8. Secondly, The vast and unspeakable sums of treasure which were expended in the building and adorning of it. I know there is some difference among learned men about reducing the Hebrew signatures of moneys unto our present account; but let the esti- mate be as low as by any can reasonably be imagined, setting aside what Solomon expended of his own revenue and getting, the pro- vision left by David towards the work, of “an hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver, besides brass and iron without weight, with timber and stone,” 1 Chron.
SECT. 6-9.] THE MESSIAH TO BE COME, 289
xxii. 14, doth far exceed all the treasures that the greatest part, if
~ not all the kings of the earth, are at this day possessed of. For, on
the ordinary computation and balance of coins, the gold amounted to £450,000,000,* and the silver unto £3,750,000,000, besides what was dedicated by his princes, and out of his peculiar treasure. He that would be satisfied what immense sums of his own Solomon added to all this, may consult Villalpandus on this subject. And what might be the product of this expense, wisely managed, is not easy to be conceived. It seems to me that the whole revenue of Herod was scarce able to find bread for Solomon’s workmen; so unlikely is it that his fabric should be equal unto that other. It was surely a glorious house that all’ this charge was expended about.
9. Thirdly, It appears further from the number of workmen employed in the structure. We need not greaten this number out of conjectures with Villalpandus, who reckons above four hundred thousand, seeing there is evident mention in the Scripture of an hundred and fourscore and three thousand and six hundred, besides
> The yalue of the talent is variously estimated. If the talent of gold, according to one estimate, amount in value to £5,075, the total sum would be £507,500,000; if, according to another estimate, it amount to £5,250, the total would be £525,000,000 ; if to £5,475, the total would be £547,500,000. Again, the talent of silver has been valued at £342, 3s. 9d. by some; at £353, 11s. 10d. by others; and at £375 by others, The total sums would thus be respectively, £342,187,500, or £353,591,666, 18s. 4d., or £375,500,000.
If we calculate according to the specified weight in ounces, valuing the gold at £3, 10s. and the silver at 5s. per ounce, the results would be £525,000,000, and £375,000,000. We make these remarks, inasmuch as it is somewhat difficult to un- derstand on what principles the calculations in the text above were made, and there is reason to fear some inaccuracy in the printing. The following remarks on this matter by Dr Kitto are deserving of attention :—
«The stated numbers are found in the Book of Chronicles, which was written after the Babylonish captivity. Now, it is reasonable to suppose that the people, most of whom were born and bred in Chaldea, used the weights and measures of that country —of which we have, indeed, a singular proof in the fact that the Persian and Chal- dean gold coin called the daric is mentioned in the computation of the donations of the nobles, although the coin was assuredly unknown in David’s time. Then the yalue of the Babylonian talent was greatly less than that of the Hebrews; that of the talent of gold being £3,500, and of silver £218, 15s., which would reduce the entire amount to about £600,000,000. ‘This, though an immense reduction, seems still to be far too large, and some therefore think the Syriac talent to be intended, which was but one-fifth of the Babylonian. This would bring it down to the comparatively reasonable, and not absolutely impossible, sum of £120,000,000. here is an inde- pendent corroboration of this in the fact that Josephus, whether by so reading in the
- original text as then extant, or by reducing the talents into talents of accompt, pro-
duces nearly the same result, by making the talents of gold not more than ten thousand, and of silver a hundred thousand. Even this sum seems far too large in comparison with any thing known to our experience; but we have no determinate data on which it may be further reduced, without supposing a corruption of the text of Chronicles. ‘Ihis is possible, from the facility with which numbers are corrupted in the course of time, and from the circumstance that the numbers of Chronicles repeatedly differ from those of the same account in the Book of Kings, and are always in excess ; which hence may be the case here also, where there is no parallel text in Kings to supply the means of comparison. It is certain that the details in Kings, so far as given, are favourable to a lower estimate.”—Eb.
VOL, XVIII 19
b> ‘ te
a 4 a
290 OTHER TESTIMONIES PROVING [EXERC. XII.
the Tyrians that were hired, who, by their wages, seem also to have been a great number, 2 Chron. ii. 10; that is, there were an hundred and fifty-three thousand and six hundred strangers, of the posterity of the Canaanites, verses 17, 18, and thirty thousand Israelites, 1 Kings v. 13. Neither was all this multitude engaged in this work for a few days or months, but for full seven years, verse 38; and therein, as Josephus observes, the speed of the work was almost as admirable as its magnificence. And what a glorious structure might be raised by such numbers of men, in such a space of time, when nothing was wanting unto them, which by the immense treasures before mentioned could be procured, may easily be conceived. It doth not appear that the whole number of the people, rich and poor, who were gathered together under Zerubbabel after the return from the captivity, did equal the number of Solomon’s builders; so that they were not like to erect a fabric answerable unto what he erected: nor can it be imagined that Herod employed so many in the whole work as Solomon had to oversee his labourers.