Exo 26:15-30 | KD | STEP | The wooden framework . - , Exo 26:16. The boards for the dwelling were to be made “of acacia-wood standing,” i.e., so that they could stand upright; each ten cubits long and one and a half broad. The thickness is not given; and if, on the one hand, we are not to imagine them too thin, as Josephus does, for example, who says they were only four fingers thick (Ant. iii. 6, 3), we have still less reason for following Rashi , Lund , Bähr and others, who suppose them to have been a cubit in thickness, thus making simple boards into colossal blocks, such as could neither have been cut from acacia-trees, nor carried upon desert roads. To obtain boards of the required breadth, to or three planks were no doubt joined together according to the size of the trees.

‏ Exodus 26:15-30

The wooden framework. - Exo 26:15, Exo 26:16. The boards for the dwelling were to be made “of acacia-wood standing,” i.e., so that they could stand upright; each ten cubits long and one and a half broad. The thickness is not given; and if, on the one hand, we are not to imagine them too thin, as Josephus does, for example, who says they were only four fingers thick (Ant. iii. 6, 3), we have still less reason for following Rashi, Lund, Bähr and others, who suppose them to have been a cubit in thickness, thus making simple boards into colossal blocks, such as could neither have been cut from acacia-trees, nor carried upon desert roads. ^{▼▼Kamphausen (Stud. und Krit. 1859, p. 117) appeals to Bähr’s Symbolik 1, p. 261-2, and Knobel, Exod. p. 261, in support of the opinion, that at any rate formerly there were genuine acacias of such size and strength, that beams could have been cut from them a cubit and a half broad and a cubit thick; but we look in vain to either of these writings for such authority as will establish this fact. Expressions like those of Jerome and Hasselquist, viz., grandes arbores and arbos ingens ramosissima, are far too indefinite. It is true that, according to Abdullatif, the Sont is “a very large tree,” but he gives a quotation from Dinuri, in which it is merely spoken of as “a tree of the size of a nut-tree.” See the passages cited in Rosenmόller’s bibl. Althk. iv. 1, p. 278, Not. 7, where we find the following remark of Wesling on Prosper. Alpin. de plantis Aeg.: Caudicem non raro ampliorem deprehendi, quam ut brachio meo circumdari possit. Even the statement of Theophrast (hist. plant. 4, 3), to the effect that rafters are cut from these trees 12 cubits long (δωδεκάπηχυς ἐρέψιμος ὕλη), is no proof that they were beams a cubit and a half broad and a cubit thick. And even if there had been trees of this size in the peninsula of Sinai in Moses’ time, a beam of such dimensions, according to Kamphausen's calculation, which is by no means too high, would have weighed more than twelve cwt. And certainly the Israelites could never have carried beams of this weight with them through the desert; for the waggons needed would have been such as could never be used where there are no beaten roads.}

To obtain boards of the required breadth, to or three planks were no doubt joined together according to the size of the trees. Exo 26:17

Every board was to have two ידות (lit., hands or holders) to hold them upright, pegs therefore; and they were to be “bound to one another” (משׁלּב, from שׁלב in Chald. to connect, hence שׁלבּים in 1Ki 7:28, the corner plates that hold together the four sides of a chest), not “pegged into one another,” but joined together by a fastening dovetailed into the pegs, by which the latter were fastened still more firmly to the boards, and therefore had greater holding power than if each one had been simply sunk into the edge of the board. Exo 26:18-21

Twenty of these boards were to be prepared for the side of the dwelling that was turned towards the south, and forty sockets (אדנים foundations, Job 38:6) or bases for the pegs, i.e., to put the pegs of the boards into, that the boards might stand upright; and the same number of boards and sockets for the north side. תּימנה, “southward,” is added to נגבּה לפאת in Exo 26:18, to give a clearer definition of negeb, which primarily means the dry, and then the country to the south; an evident proof that at that time negeb was not established as a geographical term for the south, and therefore that it was not written here by a Palestinian, as Knobel supposes, but by Moses in the desert.

The form of the “sockets” is not explained, and even in Exo 38:27, in the summing up of the gifts presented for the work, it is merely stated that a talent of silver (about 93 lb.) was applied to every socket. Exo 26:22-24

Six boards were to be made for the back of the dwelling westwards (ימּה), and two boards “for the corners or angels of the dwelling at the two outermost (hinder) sides.” למקצּעת (for cornered), from מקצּע, equivalent to מקצוע an angle (Exo 26:24; Eze 46:21-22), from קצע to cut off, lit., a section, something cut off, hence an angle, or corner-piece. These corner boards (Exo 26:24) were to be “doubled (תּאמם) from below, and whole (תּמּים, integri, forming a whole) at its head (or towards its head, cf. אל Exo 36:29) with regard to the one ring, so shall it be to both of them (so shall they both be made); to the two corners shall they be” (i.e., designed for the two hinder corners). The meaning of these words, which are very obscure in some points, can only be the following: the two corner beams at the tack were to consist of two pieces joined together at a right angle, so as to form as double boards one single whole from the bottom to the top. The expressions “from below” and “up to its head” are divided between the two predicates “doubled” (תּאמים) and “whole” (תּמּים), but they belong to both of them. Each of the corner beams was to be double from the bottom to the top, and still to form one whole. There is more difficulty in the words האחת אל־הטּבּעת in Exo 26:24. It is impossible to attach any intelligible meaning to the rendering “to the first ring,” so that even Knobel, who proposed it, has left it unexplained. There is hardly any other way of explaining it, than to take the word אל in the sense of “having regard to a thing,” and to understand the words as meaning, that the corner beams were to form one whole, from the face that each received only one ring, probably at the corner, and not two, viz., one on each side. This one ring was placed half-way up the upright beam in the corner or angle, in such a manner that the central bolt, which stretched along the entire length of the walls (Exo 26:28), might fasten into it from both the side and back. Exo 26:25-27

Sixteen sockets were to be made for these eight boards, two for each. - Exo 26:26-29. To fasten the boards, that they might not separate from one another, bars of acacia-wood were to be made and covered with gold, five for each of the three sides of the dwelling; and though it is not expressly stated, yet the reference to rings in Exo 26:29 as holders of the bars (לבּריחים בּתּים) is a sufficient indication that they were passed through golden rings fastened into the boards. Exo 26:28-29

“And the middle bar in the midst of the boards (i.e., at an equal distance from both top and bottom) shall be fastening (מבריח) from one end to the other.” As it thus expressly stated with reference to the middle bar, that it was to fasten, i.e., to reach along the walls from one end to the other, we necessarily conclude, with Rashi and others, that the other four bars on every side were not to reach the whole length of the walls, and may therefore suppose that they were only half as long as the middle one, so that there were only three rows of bars on each wall, the upper and lower being composed of two bars each. Exo 26:30

“And set up the dwelling according to its right, as was shown thee upon the mountain” (cf. Exo 25:9). Even the setting up and position of the dwelling were not left to human judgment, but were to be carried out כּמשׁפּטו, i.e., according to the direction corresponding to its meaning and purpose. From the description which is given of the separate portions, it is evident that the dwelling was to be set up in the direction of the four quarters of the heavens, the back being towards the west, and the entrance to the east; whilst the whole of the dwelling formed an oblong of thirty cubits long, ten broad, and ten high. The length we obtain from the twenty boards of a cubit and a half in breadth; and the breadth, by adding to the nine cubits covered by the six boards at the back, half a cubit as the inner thickness of each of the corner beams. The thickness of the corner beams is not given, but we may conjecture that on the outside which formed part of the back they were three-quarters of a cubit thick, and that half a cubit is to be taken as the thickness towards the side. In this case, on the supposition that the side beams were a quarter of a cubit thick, the inner space would be exactly ten cubits broad and thirty and a quarter long; but the surplus quarter would be taken up by the thickness of the pillars upon which the inner curtain was hung, so that the room at the back would form a perfect cube, and the one at the front an oblong of exactly twenty cubits in length, ten in breadth, and ten in height.