What Did Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem Look Like?
Michael Avi-Yonah’s iconic Temple model has its golden anniversary
2016 was the golden anniversary of Israeli archaeologist Michael Avi-Yonah’s model of Herod’s Temple. The model, originally commissioned for the Holy Land Hotel in Jerusalem and part of a much larger model of ancient Jerusalem, is now housed in the Israel Museum. Photo: Steven Fine.
The year 2016 marked the 50th anniversary of the now-iconic model of Herod’s Temple created by Israeli historian and archaeologist Michael Avi-Yonah. The model, completed in 1966 after four years of construction, was commissioned by Hans Kroch of the Holy Land Hotel in Jerusalem. After 40 years at the hotel, in 2006 the model was restored and moved to its current home at the Israel Museum.
The model of Herod’s Temple is part of a larger model of ancient Jerusalem. It depicts Jerusalem as it was before the Romans destroyed the city—and Herod’s Temple—in 70 C.E. during the First Jewish Revolt against Rome. But just how accurate is the model? In “A Temple’s Golden Anniversary” in the January/February 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Peter J. Schertz and Steven Fine discuss this tantalizing question.
Michael Avi-Yonah used both textual and archaeological sources—including Josephus’s writings, the New Testament, later Rabbinic sources and depictions on artifacts such as Jewish revolt coins, as well as his own extensive knowledge of Herodian, Near Eastern and Roman architectural styles—to create a “highly fanciful and also highly probable” model of Herod’s Temple.
As with any reconstruction of a long destroyed ancient building, especially one as important as Herod’s Temple, many complications surround Michael Avi-Yonah’s model. Josephus describes Herod’s Temple extensively in his Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews, but each description differs slightly, and neither allows for easy architectural reconstruction. Other elements of Josephus’s descriptions, such as the height of the Temple gate doors—which Josephus lists at 49 feet high and 24.5 feet wide—could be exaggerated, as Josephus was wont to do. However, doors of this size were known to exist in the ancient world. Two examples can be found in Rome itself: at the Pantheon and at the Senate House in the Roman Forum. Thus, Avi-Yonah’s model of Herod’s Temple stays true to Josephus’s description. This is but one of the decisions Avi-Yonah had to make concerning his representation of Herod’s Temple.
Become a BAS All-Access Member Now!
Read Biblical Archaeology Review online, explore 50 years of BAR, watch videos, attend talks, and more
What are some of the other controversies and complications surrounding Herod’s Temple model? For the answer to this question and more, read the full article “A Temple’s Golden Anniversary” by Peter J. Schertz and Steven Fine as it appears in the January/February 2016 issue of BAR.
BAS Library Members: Read the full article “A Temple’s Golden Anniversary” by Peter J. Schertz and Steven Fine in the January/February 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review.
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on January 10, 2016.
Related reading in Bible History Daily
Get more biblical Archaeology: Become a Member
The world of the Bible is knowable. We can learn about the society where the ancient Israelites, and later Jesus and the Apostles, lived through the modern discoveries that provide us clues.
Biblical Archaeology Review is the guide on that fascinating journey. Here is your ticket to join us as we discover more and more about the biblical world and its people.
Each issue of Biblical Archaeology Review features lavishly illustrated and easy-to-understand articles such as:
• Fascinating finds from the Hebrew Bible and New Testament periods
• The latest scholarship by the world's greatest archaeologists and distinguished scholars
• Stunning color photographs, informative maps, and diagrams
• BAR's unique departments
• Reviews of the latest books on biblical archaeology
The BAS Digital Library includes:
• 45+ years of Biblical Archaeology Review
• 20+ years of Bible Review online, providing critical interpretations of biblical texts
• 8 years of Archaeology Odyssey online, exploring the ancient roots of the Western world in a scholarly and entertaining way,
• The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land
• Video lectures from world-renowned experts.
• Access to 50+ curated Special Collections,
• Four highly acclaimed books, published in conjunction with the Smithsonian Institution: Aspects of Monotheism, Feminist Approaches to the Bible, The Rise of Ancient Israel and The Search for Jesus.
The All-Access membership pass is the way to get to know the Bible through biblical archaeology.
Related Posts
Must-Read Free eBooks
Want more Bible history?
Sign up to receive our email newsletter and never miss an update.
All-Access Membership
All-Access Membership
Dig into the illuminating world of the Bible with a BAS All-Access Membership. Get your print subscription to BAR and your online access to the BAS Library—as well as FREE online talks and Travel/Study discounts. Start your journey into the biblical past today!
Models are always nice to get some kind of image of what it might have been like.
The issue I have is the placement of the Temple on what we call today the Temple Mount.
From all the reading I have done over the years, it appears the Temple Mount is actually the former Roman Antonia Fortress.
The Bible and all historical writings put the Temples in the old city of David by the Gihon Spring.
I agree fully:
From what I have read there was only one substantial spring in Jerusalem, namely the Gihon Spring in die old City of David. Although nothing remains of that temple (as Yeshua HaMashiach indeed predicted), the ruins of of the Old City of David can still be seen today and lies much lower down than the current “official Temple Mount”. According to the bible the temple was in the City of David there was a strong spring inside the temple, which then probably was the Gihon Spring.
It thus seems clear that all the current tensions about the Jews wanting to rebuild the Jewish temple on the current “official” Temple Mount, which hosts the Muslim holy sites of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, is all a storm in a tea cup:
It seems logical that when Yeshua HaMashiach comes again to establish himself as the promised Messiah of Israel in Jerusalem and build his 1000 year reign of earthly peace on earth, he will simply skip the “official” Temple Mount and build Ezekiel’s promised messianic temple much lower down in the Old City of David, which seems to me to not be disputed ground.
The Western Wall was never part of the Temple, but in fact it was a part of the platform that Herod expanded during his Construction. Thus, there is nothing remaining of the Temple but the extended platform is still standing
@adam and cb: the Western Wall is a remnant of the retaining wall constructed around the top of the mountain…think of it like an upside down shoebox atop a leveled-off mountain peak, w the temple itself built atop the shoebox. The wall was not part of the temple proper.
@ Adam This is a question that has troubled me for many years. If Yeshua HaMashiach was correct in His prediction that not one stone of Herod’s Temple would remain standing upon another, then the (so-called) Western/Wailing Wall cannot be a part of that Temple building.
Perhaps the greater question has not as much to do with what the Temple looked like, but with where it was sited!
Blessings, and shalom.
I agree fully: From what I have read there was only one substantial spring in Jerusalem, namely the Gihon Spring in die old City of David. Although nothing remains of that temple (as Yeshua HaMashiach indeed predicted), the ruins of of the Old City of David can still be seen today and lies much lower down than the current “official Temple Mount”. According to the bible the temple was in the City of David there was a strong spring inside the temple, which then probably was the Gihon Spring.
It thus seems clear that all the current tensions about the Jews wanting to rebuild the Jewish temple on the current “official” Temple Mount, which hosts the Muslim holy sites of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, is all a storm in a tea cup:
It seems logical that when Yeshua HaMashiach comes again to establish himself as the promised Messiah of Israel in Jerusalem and build his 1000 year reign of earthly peace on earth, he will simply skip the “official” Temple Mount and build Ezekiel’s promised messianic temple much lower down in the Old City of David, which seems to me to not be disputed ground.
Avi-Yonah was a brilliant scholar and he had good reason to do what he did. I love to see and study this particular model, for it helps me understand first-century Jerusalem much better. Herod’s temple was probably quite different than Solomon’s temple. When Josephus is talking about the “early wall” or the “first wall,” his terminology is connecting First Temple and Second Temple Jerusalem. When you look at the model of Second Temple Jerusalem and the Herodian Temple, you get an outline of what First Temple Jerusalem may have looked like. The Second Wall that you see in the model is probably rebuilt from the wall that existed there in First Temple times. The term used by Josephus “early wall” refers back to the First Temple Jerusalem. Thus the walls that Nehemiah built, with a few exceptions, were essentially the walls of First Temple Jerusalem that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed. Thank you Avi-Yonah.
Wasn’t Herod’s Temple merely a remodeling of Solomon’s Temple, albeit on a grand scale? BTW, Isn’t the ‘Wailing Wall’ the foundation of one of Herod’s stables?
The Messiah said of The Temple that “not one stone would remain on another” and Josephus wrote that “the Romans dug up the Temple’s foundation to get to the melted gold”.
And very possibly, Josephus was trying to equal or better the Roman gates. He was a fierce defender of Judaism, and would not have wanted it to even appear to be inferior to Rome.
Well, assuming all of that is true and that Solomon did not build his temple under direction from the God who brought them out of Egypt, the temple pictured here is what Michael Avi-Yonah thinks Herod’s Temple looked like. Which was completed some 600 years or so after Solomon’s temple was totally destroyed by Nebuchanezzar and the Babylonians.
The Israelites came from Egypt. And King Solomon’s wife was a daughter of a pharaoh of Egypt. And Strabo said that the majority of priests in the Herodian Temple were Egyptians. So I think we could safely assume that the Solomonic Temple would look a lot more Egyptian than the image here. The pillars would have the open or closed lotus capitals, for a start.