Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Kings 10:22
For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
22. For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish ] i.e. Of ships such as were used in the trade with Tarshish (cf. 1Ki 22:48). These would probably be of the largest build then possible. Tarshish is most likely Tartessus in the south of Spain, with which place the Tyrians had considerable trade, and it is not difficult to understand how such a class of traffic would give a name to the vessels that bore it, just as we say now ‘an East Indiaman.’ Josephus explains the name by saying they were ships which plied ‘in the Tarsic sea as it is called.’ But it is clear that the articles brought in Solomon’s fleet could not be found in the country about Tartessus, except perhaps some gold. It is better therefore to understand the name as derived from the character of the craft rather than from the place to which they sailed.
once in three years came the navy ] The voyage here alluded to was most likely the voyage to Ophir mentioned in 1Ki 9:28. The time consumed between voyage and voyage would be partly spent in loading and unloading, and in traffic at the various marts at which the fleet touched. Josephus explains that the things brought were procured by barter, though neither he nor the text tells us what was taken in the fleet when the voyage commenced.
ivory, and apes, and peacocks ] The words used for the two first of these are most likely of Sanskrit origin, the second entirely, the first in part; and as peacocks are natives of India these names point to India as the source from which Solomon’s imports were drawn. Whether the ships visited India or collected their cargoes on the coasts of Arabia and in the Persian Gulf it is not easy to decide. The time occupied is enough for even a ship of that period to have coasted round India.
In the LXX. after 1Ki 10:22 is inserted great part of the substance of that long omission noticed above from 1Ki 10:15-25, in chapter 9; though there is no mention made of Pharaoh’s expedition against Gezer, nor of the daughter of Pharaoh coming out of Zion to dwell in the house built for her, nor of Solomon’s sacrifices thrice in the year.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
This is given as the reason of the great plentifulness of silver in the time of Solomon. The navy of Tharshish (not the same as the navy of Ophir, 1Ki 9:26) must therefore have imported very large quantities of that metal. Tharshish, or Tartessus, in Spain, had the richest silver mines known in the ancient world, and had a good deal of gold also; apes and ivory were produced by the opposite coast of Africa; and, if north Africa did not produce peacocks, which is uncertain, she may have produced the birds called here tukkiyim, which some translate parrots, others guinea-fowl – the latter being a purely African bird. The etymology of the Hebrew words here rendered ivory, apes, and peacocks, is uncertain; but even if of Indian origin, the Jews may have derived their first knowledge of ivory, apes, and peacocks, through nations which traded with India, and may thus have got the words into their language long before the time of Solomon. The names once fixed would be retained, whatever the quarter from where the things were procured afterward.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Ki 10:22
The king had at sea a navy of Tharshish.
The lessons of prosperity
The period of Solomons reign was the period of the greatest commercial, political, and intellectual splendour that Israel knew.
I. The advantages of a state of prosperity. Christians are sometimes disposed to look with suspicion on wealth and greatness. Lord Bacon said that prosperity was the blessing of the Old Testament, and adversity the blessing of the New Testament. But this aphorism may very easily be misunderstood. Prosperity is the blessing of the New Testament as much as it is of the Old. In its proper nature, in its legitimate influence, in its Divine design, prosperity must be regarded as a blessing. One of Emersons ancestors was in the habit of praying that none of his posterity might be rich. It is easy to imagine a man offering a prayer like that for his posterity, although it would be rather a shabby thing to do, but you will hardly find a sane man offering such a prayer for himself. Terrestrial prosperity is still one of Gods benedictions.
1. Prosperity is a blessing, as it widens the range of our physical enjoyments.
2. Prosperity is a blessing, as it gives freer play to mans intellectual powers, and renders possible a fuller intellectual life. Elihu Burritt laments that the English peasant is a blind painter, creating on the hillside glorious pictures in green and gold, but strangely insensible to the splendour he creates. Ruskin complains that few people ever look at the sky. Emerson writes ruefully that whilst he was strolling on the beach in raptures with the azure and spiritual seat the tanned fishermen had nothing to say to one another except, Hows fish? And most of our intellectual masters lash us for our neglect of the sights and sounds of a glorious creation.
3. Prosperity is a blessing, as it gives opportunity for the expression of highest character. Prosperity properly used, truly sanctified, brings character to its very highest and brightest manifestations. Humility is never more lovely than when it is clothed in scarlet; moderation is never more impressive than when it sits at banquets; simplicity is never more delightful than when it dwells amid magnificence; purity is never more divine than when its white robes are seen in palaces; gentleness and kindness are never more touching than when displayed by the great and powerful.
4. Prosperity is a blessing, as it enables us to act out more frilly our noblest aspirations. It is quite true that many who promise large things when their ship of gold comes in, nevertheless on the arrival of that gallant bark forthwith put the whole cargo into bonded stores, but noble souls rejoice exceedingly to find their power increased to glorify God in the service of humanity.
II. The perils of a state of prosperity. It has its perils to a nation. The ships of Solomon brought ruin; so did the ships of Carthage, of Greece, of Rome; so did the rich argosies of Spain. The other day in Whitby they showed me the ruins of the grand old Abbey. On the south aspect the wall is much more dilapidated than on the north, showing, it would seem, that the light of the sun had been more destructive than all the wild storms of the North Sea. So the sun of prosperity has often proved more fatal to empire than the bitterest tempests of danger and want and conflict. There is plenty of morbid matter everywhere, and the sun of prosperity soon develops it disastrous|y enough. Prosperity has its perils to the individual. It is said that birds of paradise are often captured through their becoming intoxicated with the spice forests on which they alight, and we have all seen fine men and women, with the light of heaven in their eye and the beauty of holiness in their life, fall miserable victims to prosperity. Some rich men degenerate fearfully, so do some popular men. On the American prairies travellers are sometimes brought to a standstill through the wheels of their chariots becoming locked by the flowers which grow there so profusely; and many a noble pilgrim to heaven has been hindered, brought to a fatal halt, by the golden and purple flowers of fortune which Heaven, in its goodness, had made to spring in his path. The lower good may destroy the higher good; as a man becomes richer in gold he may become poorer in faith, in virtue, in charity, in hope. Christianity gives us a social ideal of prime interest and efficacy. The curse of the old civilisations was selfishness. I made me great works; I builded me houses; I planted me vineyards, etc. (Ecc 2:4-9). The Is stand up like a regiment of Grenadiers. Here was the curse of the old nations, in the flush of their power and prosperity. Here is the curse of much of the prosperity of to-day. Selfishness is the rock on which rich argosies suffer shipwreck, the rock on which the grandeur of nations and the happiness of men go to pieces. Christ changes the I into we, the my into our. Christianity brings us the larger measure of moral power. (W. L. Watkinson.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 22. A navy of Tharshish] For probable conjectures concerning this place, and the three years’ voyage, see at the end of this and the preceding chapter. 1Kg 10:29; “1Ki 9:28“.
Apes] kophim; probably a species of monkey rather than ape.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
A navy of Tharshish; either, first, the ships of the sea, which may seem to be called Tarshish, as Psa 48:7; Isa 60:9, from an eminent part of the sea near Judea, so called. Or rather, the ships that went to Tarshish; for Tarshish was the name of a certain place upon the sea, famous for its traffic with merchants, as it is manifest from Isa 23:6,10; 66:19; Jer 10:9; Eze 27:12; and it was a place very remote from Judea, as appears from the three years usually spent in that voyage. But whether it was Spain, where in those times there was abundance of gold and silver, as Strabo and others affirm, or some place in the Indies, it is needless to determine.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22. a navy of TharshishTartessusin Spain. There gold, and especially silver, was obtained, anciently,in so great abundance that it was nothing accounted of in the days ofSolomon. But “Tarshish” came to be a general term for theWest (Jon 1:3).
at seaon theMediterranean.
once in three yearsthatis, every third year. Without the mariner’s compass they had to coastalong the shore. The ivory, apes, and peacocks might have beenpurchased, on the outward or homeward voyage, on the north coast ofAfrica, where the animals were to be found. They were particularized,probably as being the rarest articles on board.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish, with the navy of Hiram,…. Tharshish was not the place the navy went from, but whither it went to, as appears from 2Ch 9:21 and designs not Tarsus in Cilicia; nor Tartessus in Spain, or Gades, or which was however near it; though it appears from Strabo s and Mela t that the Phoenicians were acquainted with those parts, and were possessed of them; and particularly, according to Velleius Paterculus u, the navy of Tyre traded thither before the days of Solomen; and Vitringa w is clear in it, that these were ships that traded to Tartessus, with the ships of Tyre; and it is more likely that that place is meant than Carthage, now called Tunis, in Africa; though the Targum here calls it the navy, the navy of Africa; but as Tharshish is sometimes used for the sea in general, here it may signify a particular sea, so called: and which Josephus x names the Tarsic sea, the same with the Indian sea; and points to the same country where Ophir was, which was washed by it, and to which the two fleets joined were bound. This is observed, to account for it how Solomon came by so much gold:
once in three years came the navy of Tharshish; it returned in such a space of time; navigation not being improved as now, and sailing by coasts, and what with their stay abroad to sell and purchase goods, and to refit their ships, as well as sometimes contrary winds, they were so long in performing this voyage, which is now done in a few months:
bringing gold and silver; so that silver was accounted of, and used for some purposes, though not for the king’s plate:
ivory, and apes, and peacocks; ivory is the elephant’s tooth, as the word signifies; some of those are of an almost incredible size; some are said to be of ninety, others one hundred and twenty five pounds weight; Vartomannus y says, he saw in Sumatra, where some place Ophir, one that weighed three hundred and thirty pounds; though, according to the Ethiopians z the ivory is from the horns; and so say a Pausanias and others, see Eze 27:15 but it is commonly supposed to be of the two teeth in the upper jaw that stands out; and whether they are called horns or teeth, they are the same of which ivory is: of elephants there were large numbers in India, bigger and stronger than those in Africa; which latter were afraid of the former, as Diodorus Siculus b, Curtius c, and Pliny d relate; so Virgil e speaks of ivory as fetched from India and Horace f also, which must be East India, for there are no ivory nor apes in the West Indies g: “apes” or “monkeys” were then, as now, brought from those parts. Strabo h reports, that when the Macedonians under Alexander were there, such a vast number of them came out of the woods, and placed themselves on the open hills, that they took them for an army of men set in battle array to fight them. Vartomannus i speaks of monkeys in the country of Calecut, of a very small price: near Surat apes are in great esteem, nor will they suffer them to be killed on any account k. There are various sorts of apes, some more like to goats, others to dogs, others to lions, and some to other animals, as Philostorgius l relates; and who also says the sphinx is one sort of them, and which he describes on his own sight of it as resembling mankind in many things, and as a very subtle animal; and so Solinus m reckons such among apes; but what come nearest in name and sound to the “kuphim” of Solomon here are those Pliny n calls “cephi”, whose fore feet he says are like the hands of men, and their hinder feet like the feet and thighs of men; and Strabo o describes a creature found in Ethiopia, called by him “ceipus” or “cepus”, which has a face like a satyr, and the rest of it is between a dog and a bear. There is a creature called “cebus” by Aristotle p, and is described as having a tail, and all the rest like a man; according to Ludolf q, “cephus” is the “orangoutang” of the Indians. The word for peacocks should rather be rendered “parrots”, so Junius; which are well known to come from India r, and from thence only, according to Pausanias s; Vartomannus t says, that at Calecut there are parrots of sundry colours, as green and purple, and others of mixed colours, and such a multitude of them, that men are appointed to keep them from the rice in the fields, as we keep crows from corn; and that they are of a small price, one is sold for two pence, or half a souse; and the number of them may be accounted for, because the Brachmans, the priests, reckon them sacred, and therefore the Indians eat them not u. Curtius w designs these, when he says, in India are birds, which are taught to imitate man’s voice; and Solinus x says, that India only produces the green parrot, that is, the East Indies, the West Indies not being then discovered; though some y think they were, and that it was thither Solomon’s navy went: certain it is there are parrots of various colours in the West Indies, which P. Martyr of Angleria frequently makes mention of in his Decades. Huetius z derives the Hebrew word here used from , which he says signifies to “join” or “adhere” to anything, as these birds will; cling to, and hang by their bills and nails on a branch of a tree, c. so that they are not easily separated from it the word is used in
De 33:3 and, according to some, in this sense. But, after all, if it should be insisted on, as it is by many, that “peacocks” are meant, these also are found in India. Alexander the great first saw them in this country, which so amazed him, that he threatened to punish those severely that should kill any of them a. Vartomannus b makes mention of them as in great numbers in some parts of India; and they are caught and sold at an easy rate at Surat c, and make part both of their game, and of their grand entertainments d; Aeianus e often speaks of them as in India in great numbers, and in great esteem.
s Geograph. l. 3. p. 104. t De Situ Orbis, l. 2. c. 6. u Hist. l. 1. in principio. w Comment. in Jesaiam, c. 23. 1. x Antiqu. l. 8. c. 7. sect. 2. y Navigat. l. 6. c. 22. z Ludolf. Ethiop. Hist. l. 1. c. 10. a Eliac. 1. p. 308, 309. Vid. Plin. l. 8. c. 3. Aelian. Hist. Animal. l. 4. c. 21. & 7. 2. & 11. 37. & 14. 5. Varro apud Schindler. Lexic Pentaglott. col. 1905. b Bibliothec. l. 2. p. 121. So Polybius, Hist. l. 5. c Hist. l. 8. c. 9. d Nat. Hist. l. 8. c. 9. e “India mittit ebur”. Georgic. l. 1. ver. 57. f “—Non aurum et ebur Indicum”. Carmin. l. 1. Ode 31.
Manetho. Apotelesm. ver. 297. & l. 4. ver. 149. Philo. de Praemiis, p. 924. g Manasseh Spes Israelis, sect. 2. p. 21. Ortel. Thesaur. Geograh. Varrerius de Ophyra. h Geograph. l. 15. p. 480. i Navigat. l. 5. c. 20. k Ovington’s Voyage to Sarat, p. 360, 361, 596. l Eccl. Hist. l. 3. c. 11. m Polyhist. c. 40. n Nat. Hist. l. 8. c. 19. o Ut supra, (Geograph.) l. 17. p. 559. p Hist. Animal. l. 2. c. 8, 9. q Ethiop. Hist. l. 1. c. 10. r Aelian. de Animal. l. 16. c. 2. “Psittacus eois ales mihi missus ab India”. Ovid. Amor. l. 2. Eleg. 6. s Corinthiaca, sive, l. 2. p. 136. t Ut supra. (Navigat. l. 5. c. 20.) u Aelian de Animal. l. 13. c. 18. w Ut supra. (Hist. l. 8. c. 9.) x Polyhistor. c. 65. y Erasm. Schmid. de America Orat. ad. Calc. Pindari, p. 261. Vatablus in loc. & in c. 9. 28. Hornius de Gent. Americ. l. 2. c. 6, 7, 8. z De Navigat. Solomon. c. 7. sect. 6. a Aelian. ut supra, (de Animal. l. 16. c. 2.) & l. 5. c. 21. Curtii Hist. l. 9. c. 1. b Navigat. l. 6. c. 7. c Ovington’s Voyage to Surat, p. 268, 269. d lbid. p. 398. e De Animal. l. 11. c. 33. & l. 13, 18. & l. 16. c. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
B. SOLOMONS OTHER WEALTH 10:2229
TRANSLATION
(22) For the king had a Tarshish fleet in the sea with the fleet of Hiram; once in three years the Tarshish fleet came, bringing gold, silver, ivory, apes and baboons. (23) So King Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth for wealth and wisdom. (24) And all the earth sought the face of Solomon to hear his wisdom which God had put in his heart. (25) And each one brought his presentvessels of silver and vessels of gold, garments, and myrrh and spices, horses and mules at an annual rate. (26) And Solomon gathered chariots and horsemen, and he had fourteen hundred chariots and twelve thousand horsemen; and he stationed[283] them in the chariot cities and with the king in Jerusalem. (27) And the king made silver in Jerusalem like stones, and cedar trees he made abundant to be like sycamore trees which are in the lowland. (28) And the horses which Solomon had were exported from Egypt and from Keveh; the kings traders got them from Kevah at a certain price. (29) And a chariot came up and went out from Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver and a horse for a hundred fifty shekels; and thus for all the kings of the Hittites, and for the kings of Aram by their hand they were brought out.
[283] The Hebrew text reads literally, and he led them. The reading and he stationed them is supported by Chronicles and by the ancient versions.
COMMENTS
The term Tarshish fleet used by the author of Kings is explained by the Chronicler as meaning ships going to Tarshish (2Ch. 9:21). Tarshish in several Old Testament texts is a place far from Palestine, probably on the Atlantic coast of Spain.[284] It was to Tarshish that Jonah was attempting to flee when he first rejected the divine commission to preach in Nineveh (Jon. 1:3; Jon. 4:2). Just as Ophir was the gold-land of the Bible, the land of Tarshish was noted for its silver. According to Ezekiel the Phoenicians traded with Tarshish and secured from thence silver, iron, tin and lead (Eze. 27:12). Jeremiah also alludes to silver from Tarshish (Jer. 10:9). The Tarshish fleet operated on a lengthy schedule away from its home port. On its three-year trips to distant lands, this fleet, like the Ophir fleet, brought back various exotic products. The gold and silver were secured in Tarshish; the apes, baboons[285] and ivory were available through the trading colonies along the coast of Africa.
[284] Stieglitz, MAAI, p. 75.
[285] Commentaries frequently assert that the words translated apes and baboons are of Indian origin. W. E. Clarke, an acknowledged expert in Sanskrit, has serious reservations about this assertion. See AJSL, XXXVI (1920), pp. 103ff. W. F. Albright argues for the Egyptian origin of these words. See ARI, p. 212.
This Tarshish fleet is probably to be distinguished from the Ophir fleet of 1Ki. 9:26-28 and 1Ki. 10:11. The cargo and schedule of the two fleets are different.[286] It is not clear which port this Tarshish fleet used as home base. If this fleet was based at Ezion-geber, then it could have sailed to Tarshish by circumnavigating Africa.[287] It seems best, however, to think of the Tarshish fleet as being based at some Mediterranean port.
[286] Keil and most commentators insist that the fleet mentioned in 1Ki. 10:22 is the same as the fleet mentioned in 1Ki. 9:26-28. The term Tarshish fleet is then taken to be a general name for all large, ocean-going ships or merchant vessels. That the term can have this meaning is clear from 1Ki. 22:48, Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir. However, 2Ch. 9:21 proves that Tarshish in reference to Solomons fleet is a geographical designation. Tuck (FTK, p. 146) and William Smith (OTH, p. 525) support the view that Solomon had two fleets.
[287] Circumnavigation of Africa, while not demonstrable for the tenth century, was certainly not technically impossible at that time. Cf. Stieglitz, MAAI, p. 156.
Solomons Tarshish fleet is said to have been with the fleet of Hiram (1Ki. 10:22). This expression might be taken to mean that both Solomon and Hiram had navies sailing the Mediterranean Sea. On the other hand, the fleet of Hiram may refer to those ships which sailed out of the port of Ezion-geber bound for Ophir. The Red Sea fleet was Hirams in the sense that he had supplied the ships to Solomon as well as the crews to man them (2Ch. 8:18). Interpreted in this way, the phrase with the fleet of Hiram confirms the opinion already advanced that Solomon had two naval operationsone on the Red Sea and one on the Mediterranean Sea. Primarily because of this extensive maritime activity Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in wealth as well as wisdom (1Ki. 10:23).
The fame of Solomon spread throughout the ancient Near East. Dignitaries from all over the civilized world came to Jerusalem to hear the wisdom of the man so richly endowed of God (1Ki. 10:24). These visitors bestowed upon Solomon luxurious presents including gold and silver vessels, garments, arms, spices and riding animals. The concluding phrase of 1Ki. 10:25 is difficult. The annual rate (lit., the matter of a year in his year) suggests that at least some of those who visited Solomon were tributaries who brought with them their annual assessment.
The closing verses of chapter 10 continue to offer convincing evidence of Solomons glory. In contravention of Deu. 17:16 Solomon multiplied to himself horses. His force of fourteen hundred chariots would appear to have been maintained largely for the sake of pomp and display. The chariot is of little tactical value in the hilly terrain of Palestine and, furthermore, Solomons reign was peaceful and hence did not necessitate such a large force. Even in time of war, David only retained for himself a tenth of the thousand chariots he captured from a Syrian king (1Ch. 18:4). Solomon was determined in every way and at any cost to rival and surpass all contemporary kings. The maintenance of twelve thousand cavalry troops is further indication of Solomons materialistic disposition. The various chariot and cavalry units were stationed throughout the land (cf. 1Ki. 9:19) as well as in Jerusalem, the royal residence (1Ki. 10:26).
In an obvious hyperbole the author declares that during the reign of Solomon, silver became as common as ordinary stones which cover the environs of Jerusalem. The highly valued cedar wood, imported from Phoenicia, became as common as the much less prestigious sycamore wood which heretofore, it would appear, had been used for building purposes. These trees grew profusely in the Shephelah, that region of rolling hills which separates the mountains of Judah from the coastal plains (1Ki. 10:27). The sycamore is a large, well-rooted spreading tree which bears an inferior kind of fig. The sycamore tree was considered so important under the reign of David that a royal supervisor was appointed over the olive trees and the sycamore trees in the Shephelah (1Ch. 27:28). The prophet Amos was engaged in cultivating these trees for their fruit at the time God called him to the prophetic office (Amo. 7:14).
The last two verses of chapter 10 describe still another source of revenue for Solomons coffershis monopolistic control of chariot and horse trading. Solomon secured horses from Egypt[288] and from Keveh[289] (Kue, NASB), the Hebrew name for Cilicia in Asia Minor. Cilicia in ancient times was the source of good horses for foreign countries. It is also known that the Egyptians, during this period, imported wood from Syria in order to manufacture chariots.[290] Since Solomon controlled all the important trade routes from Cilicia and Egypt to Syria, he seems to have held a virtual monopoly on the horse and chariot trade in this region of the world. Thus, the Neo-Hittite[291] and Aramean kings to the north depended upon Solomon for Egyptian chariots, while the Egyptians and others depended on him for Cilician horses. Solomon, as the middleman in this lucrative trade, no doubt made a handsome profit for himself. It is not known what the original prices were, but the established rate of exchange was a hundred fifty shekels ($100 BV) for one Cilician horse, and for one Egyptian chariot six hundred shekels ($400 BV).
[288] Many modern scholars think that a northern Egypt in Anatolia is intended. This theory, however, has been convincingly refuted by H. Tadmor, IEJ, II (1961), 143ff.
[289] Not linen yarn as in KJV. A few older commentators and all modern ones recognize the Hebrew word as a proper noun. Both the Septuagint and the Vulgate versions rendered it as a proper noun.
[290] Finley, BBC, p. 389.
[291] The term Hittite probably denotes the descendants of the great feudal lords who ruled districts there during the Hittite ascendancy and who had asserted their independence on the collapse of the Hittite empire about 1200 B.C. Gray, OTL, p. 250.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(22) A navy of Tharshish.There seems little doubt that the Tarshish of Scripture is properly Tartessus in Spain, which name, indeed, is drawn from an Aramaic form of Tarshish. For (a) Tarshish is first noted in Gen. 10:4 as among the descendants of Javan, the son of Japhet, which probably points to a European position; (b) in some other places (Isa. 23:1; Isa. 23:6; Isa. 23:10; Isa. 23:14; Eze. 27:12-13) as here, and in 23:48, it is closely connected with Tyre, of which Tartessus is expressly said by Arrian to have been a colony: (c) from Jon. 1:3; Jon. 4:2, we gather that it was on the Mediterranean Sea; (d) the silver, which was evidently the chief import by this navy of Tarshish, was in ancient times found in large quantities in Spain, as also the iron, lead, and tin, mentioned with the silver in Eze. 27:12. But the phrase ships of Tarshish appears to have become a technical phrase for ships of large size (see Isa. 2:17; Jer. 10:9; Psa. 48:8); hence a navy of Tarshish would not necessarily mean a navy going to Tarshish.
Now, the fleet of Solomon here named is not in the text identified with the navy of Ophir, starting from Ezion-geber. Its imports (except gold, which is not distinctive) are not the same, and the separate mention of it seems rather to argue its distinctness. The sea, moreover, unless otherwise determined by the context, would most likely mean the Great, or Mediterranean Sea; and in 2Ch. 9:21 (as also afterwards, in 2Ch. 20:36) it is expressly said that the fleet went to Tarshish. But the difficulty of this view lies in thisthat the imports of the fleet, except the silver (which, indeed, is chiefly dwelt upon), point to an Eastern, and probably an Indian origin. Not only do the peacocks expressly indicate India, which may be called their native country; but of the names used, koph, for ape, is not a Hebrew word, but closely resembles the Sanscrit kapi; and tukki, for peacock, is similarly a foreign word, closely resembling the Tamil tka. (If the ordinary reading, shen habbm, for ivory, stands, this, which is an unusual word for ivory (generally simply shen, a tooth), bears resemblance again in its second member to ibha, the Sanscrit name for elephant. But it is generally thought that the correction, shen habnm, ivory [and] ebony, should be accepted, especially as we find those two words used together in Eze. 28:15.) The only solution of this serious difficulty seems to be the supposition of a circumnavigation of Africa by fleets from Tyre to Ezion-geber, touching in Africa and India. This view also accounts for the emphatic mention of the three years voyage, which could not be necessary for going only to Tartessus and its neighbourhood. There is, indeed, something startling in the idea of so daring an enterprise in this early age. But there is a well-known passage in Herodotus (Book iv. 42) which records exactly such a voyage in the days of Pharaoh-Necho, not apparently as a new thingto say nothing of the celebrated record of the Periplus of Hanno; and it seems clear that the Tyrian seamanship and maritime enterprise were at their height in the days of Solomon.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
22. Once in three years came the navy of Tarshish This navy need not be identified with that which was built at Ezion-geber, (1Ki 9:26,) for Solomon probably had many fleets that sailed on many seas. And yet it must not be supposed that the navy of Tarshish never went to Ophir, or that ships designed to carry on commerce with Tarshish might not be built at Ezion-geber. The contrary is clearly indicated at 1Ki 22:48 and 2Ch 20:36. Scholars are now quite generally agreed that Tarshish, which figures so largely in Scripture in connexion with Phenician commerce, is to be identified with Tartessus of classic history, a city and district in southwestern Spain not far from the Straits of Gibraltar. But Solomon’s navy certainly would not require three years to go to Spain and back; and though gold and silver abounded in that country, it would hardly be the place to go for ivory, apes, and peacocks. These latter abound in India and its neighbouring isles. Hence some have been disposed to look for another Tarshish in India. But why may not the fleets of Solomon and Hiram have passed on from Spain through the Straits of Gibraltar round the Cape of Good Hope, and thus to Southern Asia? This might well have taken three years; but an enterprise of lesser magnitude could hardly have required so long a time. This supposition is rendered exceedingly plausible by the statement of Herodotus, (iv, 42,) that Necho, king of Egypt, once sent out a fleet under charge of Phenicians, who started from the Red Sea and came round through the pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar) back to Egypt again. This seems clearly to show that Africa had been circumnavigated in Herodotus’s time, and Necho’s putting the enterprise in charge of the Phenicians may have been because those far-famed navigators had accomplished such a voyage before. In short, I can see nothing impossible or improbable in the supposition that the enterprising seamen of Tyre had already, in Solomon’s time, discovered the route to India by circumnavigating Africa, and that Solomon’s fleet was wont with them to make the voyage once in three years. That this line of commerce afterwards ceased, and the route became unknown, is not to be wondered at in view of the divisions and wars that prevailed immediately after Solomon’s death, both in the land of Israel and also in all the neighbouring nations wars that resulted, in the course of a few hundred years, in the total destruction of Tyre and all her glory.
Apes , kopim, some species of the monkey tribe, still called in some parts of India kapi. They are represented on the Egyptian and Assyrian monuments as an article of traffic.
Peacocks , tukiyim. Some suppose the parrot and some the Guinea fowl to be meant; but several of the better versions and some eminent critics interpret the expression of the peacock, whose natural home is India. It is said by some authorities that these Hebrew words for ivory, apes, and peacocks are identical with the Tamil names by which they are known in Ceylon at the present day. “It has long since been decided that India was the cradle of the peacock. It is in the countries of Southern Asia, and the vast archipelago of the Eastern Ocean, that this bird appears to have fixed its dwelling, and to live in a state of freedom. All travellers who have visited these countries make mention of these birds. Thevenot encountered great numbers of them in the province of Guzzerat; Tavernier, throughout all India; and Payrard in the neighbourhood of Calcutta. La Billardiere tells us that peacocks are common in the Island of Java.” CUVIER’S Animal Kingdom. Wordsworth sees a sort of irony and sarcasm in the mention of apes and peacocks as “the climax of the produce of the commerce of Solomon. Apes and peacocks to Solomon, the wise king at Jerusalem! To gratify curiosity; to amuse the people; and perhaps to while away the time of the strange women to whom Solomon clave in love instead of cleaving to the Lord.” Here he sees one of the causes of Solomon’s fall.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Ki 10:22. Bringing gold and silver, ivory, &c. See the note on chap. 1Ki 9:28 and Scheuchzer on the place.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Ki 10:22 For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
Ver. 22. For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish. ] That furrowed the main ocean, as some sense it; or that sailed into the Mediterranean Sea, as Joh 1:3 ; for Tarshish was the son of Javan, Gen 10:4 who first after the flood inhabited Cilicia, the chief city whereof is Tharsus; thence the neighbouring sea first, and then the rest of the Mediterranean, was call Tharsis.
Once in three years.
Bringing gold and silver and apes, and peacocks] Or, Parrots. Like unto these ships thus ladened, are the books of some sectaries, wherein, as in the Jewish Talmud –
“ Sunt mala mista bonis, sunt bona mista malis. ”
In some parts of their writings are wholesome and good passages; as in a wood or forest full of briers and brambles, there may be some violets and primroses; and as here, with apes and parrots, were gold, silver, ivory.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
navy of Tharshish = Tharshish ships, a name for large ocean-going ships (like English “East-Indiamen”). When mentioned as a place it is identified by Oppert with Tartessis = the Andalusia of to-day, noted for silver (not gold), iron, tin, and lead (Jer 10:9. Eze 27:12). They sailed from Tyre to the West Mediterranean, and from Ezion-geber to Ophir (Arabia, India, and East Africa), 1Ki 9:26-28 and 1Ki 10:11.
ivory = elephants’ tusks.
apes, and peacocks. The Hebrew for these are Indian words (Tamil).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Tharshish: 1Ki 22:48, Gen 10:4, 2Ch 9:21, 2Ch 20:36, 2Ch 20:37, Psa 48:7, Psa 72:10, Isa 2:16, Isa 23:1, Isa 23:6, Isa 23:10, Isa 60:9, Isa 66:19, Eze 27:12, Jon 1:3, Tarshish
ivory: or, elephant’s teeth, 1Ki 10:18, Amo 3:15
apes: Kophim, rather monkeys, the same as the Greek , , or , and Roman Cephus, which animal both Pliny and Solinus inform us was brought from Ethiopia. The same name appears in the monkeys, called KEIIIEN in the Prenestine Pavement, and in the French cep or ceb.
peacocks: Job 39:13
Reciprocal: 1Ki 22:39 – the ivory house 2Ch 8:18 – General 2Ch 9:10 – brought gold Son 7:4 – ivory Jer 10:9 – Tarshish Eze 27:15 – of ivory Eze 27:25 – ships
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ki 10:22. For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish Ships that went to Tharshish. For Tharshish was the name of a place, upon the sea, famous for its traffic with merchants, and a place very remote from Judea, as appears from the three years usually spent in that voyage. But whether it was Spain, where in those times there was abundance of gold and silver, as Strabo and others affirm; or some place in the Indies, it is as needless as it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine. These words are here added to give a further account how Solomon came to have gold in such abundance: he trafficked for it in another fleet, besides that which went to Ophir. Once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, &c. It is likely a great part of this time was spent in digging for the gold, or in hunting the elephants, apes, and peacocks, and in other transactions of commerce. And apes The Hebrew word , kophim, is both by the ancients and moderns translated apes; which creature Pliny calls cephus, and says they were seen but once at Rome in his days, and that they came from Ethiopia. And peacocks These, being so beautiful a bird, might very probably be brought from foreign countries into Judea as a great rarity, there being none there before.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
10:22 For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of {h} Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
(h) By Tharshish is meant Cilicia, which was abundant in the variety of precious things.