Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Kings 14:26
And he took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house; he even took away all: and he took away all the shields of gold which Solomon had made.
26. he even took away all ] Instead of these words the LXX. gives: ‘and the golden shields which David took from the hands of the servants of Hadadezer king of Zobah and brought them to Jerusalem.’ On these captures of David see 2Sa 8:7.
On the shields of gold made by Solomon cf. 1Ki 10:17. At the close of the verse the LXX. adds that Shishak ‘brought’ his booty ‘into Egypt.’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The circumstances of Shishaks invasion, related here with extreme brevity, are given with some fulness by the author of Chronicles (marginal reference). It is still a question whether the submission of the Jewish king is or is not expressly recorded in the Karnak inscription. Midway in the list of cities and tribes occurs the entry YUDeH-MALK which it has been proposed to translate Judah, king. Others regard it as the name of a Palestinian town not otherwise known to us.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 26. He took away the treasures] All the treasures which Solomon had amassed, both in the temple and in his own houses; a booty the most immense ever acquired in one place.
All the shields of gold which Solomon had made.] These were three hundred in number, and were all made of beaten gold. See a computation of their value in Clarke’s note on “1Ki 10:17“.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He took away the treasures; it is implied, that first he took the city; which may seem strange considering the great strength of that city, and how much time it took Nebuchadnezzar and Titus to take it. But, first, It might cost Shishak also some time and a long siege ere he took it, though that be not here related. Secondly, It is probable that David and Solomon, in their building and altering of this city, had more respect to state and magnificence than to its defence, as having no great cause to fear the invasion of any enemies, and being too secure in reference to their posterity, because of Gods promise of the kingdom to be continued to them and to their seed for ever. And it is probable and certain, that after the division between Judah and Israel, the kings of Judah did add very much to the fortifications of this city.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord,…. Which perhaps Jeroboam had informed him of, and for the sake of which he came, as well as to make a diversion in favour of Jeroboam, who had contracted an intimacy with him when in Egypt; and who might have no regard for Rehoboam, who was not a son of Pharaoh’s daughter, and so no relation to him: these were the treasures which David had left to his son Solomon, and had dedicated for the temple, even gold, silver, and vessels, which he put among the treasures of the house of the Lord, and perhaps added to them, 1Ki 7:51, and the treasures of the king’s house; the riches, gold, silver, and jewels, whatever of worth and value he had in his chests and cabinets:
he even took away all: that he could find and come at; for that there were some left is plain from 1Ki 15:18,
and he took away all the shields of gold which Solomon had made; and which were put in the house of the forest of Lebanon, 1Ki 10:16.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(26) He even took away all.There is a touch of pathos in the description of the utter spoil of the treasures in which Solomon and Israel had gloried, and which now served only to buy off the victorious Egyptians. There is no notice of any sack of Jerusalem, nor, as in later cases, of any desecration of the Temple, or even of the plunder of its decorations. The record seems to imply surrender of the city and its treasures. The idea sometimes advanced, that, like the capture of Rome by the Gauls, the invasion of Shishak destroyed all ancient monuments and archives, has therefore no historical support from this passage; and with it many conclusions derived from it as to the dates of our Scriptural records must pass away.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
26. He took away the treasures The splendour of Solomon’s buildings, and the immense treasures which he had amassed, were doubtless spoken of far and wide, and to obtain these treasures was probably the main object of Shishak’s expedition. He may have been prompted by Jeroboam to this action, for Jeroboam had dwelt at his court, (1Ki 11:40,) and was on friendly terms with him, and would gladly see him afflict the kingdom of Judah.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Ki 14:26 And he took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house; he even took away all: and he took away all the shields of gold which Solomon had made.
Ver. 26. And he took away. ] Without any great resistance; such was the pusillanimity and effeminacy of Rehoboam; which was also laid in his dish by Shishak setting up pillars and ugly pictures thereon, to the shame of the Jewish nation, as Diodorus a showeth.
a Lib. i.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
all = “all [he could find]”.
all the shields. Some codices, with three early printed editions, and Vulgate, omit “all”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
he took away: 1Ki 7:51, 1Ki 15:18, 2Ki 24:13, 2Ch 12:9-11, Psa 39:6, Psa 89:35-45
the shields of gold: 1Ki 10:16, 1Ki 10:17, 2Ch 9:15, 2Ch 9:16, Pro 23:5, Ecc 2:18, Ecc 2:19
Reciprocal: Jos 6:19 – the treasury 2Sa 8:7 – shields 1Ki 11:39 – afflict 1Ki 11:40 – Shishak 2Ki 14:14 – all the gold 1Ch 18:7 – shields 1Ch 26:20 – treasures 1Ch 28:12 – the treasuries Ecc 4:14 – also Ecc 5:14 – and he Luk 21:1 – the treasury
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ki 14:26. And he took, &c. Rehoboam, according to Josephus, delivered up the city to him without striking a stroke; which may seem strange, considering the great strength of it, and how much time it took Nebuchadnezzar and Titus to become masters of it. But it is probable that David and Solomon, in their building and altering the city, had more respect to state and magnificence than to its defence, as having no great cause to fear the invasion of any enemies: and it is certain that after the division between Judah and Israel, the kings of Judah added very much to the fortifications of it. Add to this, that this Shishak had a vast army, as we read 2Ch 12:2, and so powerful, that as Herodotus, who calls him Sesostris, tells us, with it he conquered Asia. He took away the treasures of the Lords house Within twenty-five years after it was finished, he plundered it, as also the kings house, of all the wealth which they contained, and which had been amassed by David and Solomon. This, it is probable, had tempted Shishak to make this descent, and this Rehoboam lamely resigned to him, to prevent still worse consequences. Who that had seen the glory, the riches, the magnificence, the power of Solomon, would not have concluded, as the queen of Sheba seems to have done, that a long and lasting state of security and happiness was entailed on this people? But the Holy Scriptures inform us, that at the very time when every one was admiring and extolling Solomons glory and happiness, it was denounced unto him by the Lord himself, that if either he or his children should turn aside from following the Lord, and go after other gods, they should certainly and soon fall from their glory, and be a proverb and by-word among all people, 1Ki 11:6, &c.; and that even that house, which was viewed by all the nations around as a prodigy of magnificence and strength, should be so reduced and brought to desolation, that every one that passed by should be astonished and hiss at it. Human foresight, doubtless, then perceived no likelihood of any such change taking place; but the event soon showed that its security and continuance depended on something more than human means.