The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 129

own house thirteen years." The much tainty. And when it is further oonsidered longer period occupied in the erection of the that the nccu.mulatod dlb1·i'.s of Jerusalem royal palace is easily accounted for. In the nt one point reaches a depth of 120 feet it first place, the buildings were much larger, will be readily understood wbo.t , beta.cl.ea and the undertaking altogether was a much stand in the way of their settlement.] mol'C extensive one (ver. 2). Then, though Ver. 2.-Be built a.lao [Heh. and Tie built. seven years only were consumed in the The A. V. rendering almost contradicts the actual building of the temple, yet prepara- view just ndvo.uced, viz., that the house of tions for the work had been made, both by the forest of Lebo.non wo.s pa1·t of " o.11 the David and Solomon, for a long time before- house" (ver. l)J the house of the forest of hand. Lastly, a special force of labourers Lebanon [so called, not because it was 11, would appear to have been employed on the summer residence in Lebanon, as some have temple, while it is probable that they supposed, nor yet merely because it wu.s wrought at the pale.cee in greatly diminished built of Lebo.non cedar, but because it dis- numbers, So that the longer period spent over his own house does not argue selftsh- played a perfect thicket or forest (-W~) of ness or worldliness on Solomon's part. On cedar pillarE]; the length thereof was one the contrary, it speaks well for his piety that hUildred cubits [the temple proper was 60], be built the temple first and nrged on the.t and the breadth thereof fifty cubits [The sacred work with so much vigour. The temple was but 20. It does not follow that thirteen years de.ta from the completion of this space of 100 x 50 cubits was o.ll roofed the Sllven years of eh. vi. 38. The.t is to in, for it wonld seem o.s if the house wo.s say, the building of the temple and palace built round o. courtyo.rd. Rawlinson re- together occupied twenty years, as is ex- marks that a roof of 75 feet is II much greater pressly stated in eh. ix. 10. It is therefore than is ever found in Assyria." But it is by one of Stanley's reckless statements that nc- means certain that there was o.ny such the po.lace " was commenced at the same roof here], a.nd the height thereof thirty time as the temple, but not finished till cubits [the same as the temple], upon four eight years afterwards" ] , a.nd he flnlshed rows of cedar pillars [How these were all his house. [By Solomon's '' house " we disposed of, or what wo.s their number, it is are not to understand his private palace, or impossible to say. Thenins says they were residence proper, alone (see ver. 8), but a 400, but this is pure conjecture. The de- range of palaces, more or lees connected, scription is so meagre and partial that it is including the "house of the forest of Le- impossible to form a correot idea of the banon " (ver 2), " the porch of pillars " building. The remark ma.de above (eh. vi. (ver. G), the throne-room or judgment hall Introd. Note) as to the temple applies with (ver. 7), his own house e.nd the house of still greater force to the palaces. " There Phare.oh's daughter (ver. 8). That o.11 are few tasks more diflicul t or puzzling than these are comprehended under the term the attempt to restore o.n ancient building "house " is evident from eh. ix. 1, 10, 16; of which we possess nothing but two verbal :r.. 12, where Solomon's buildings are always descriptions; o.nd these difficulties are very spoken of as two, viz., "the house of the much enhanced when one account is written Lord " and the "king's house.'' in a language likEI Hebrew, the scientifio The situation of this Btring of palaces is terms in which o.re, from our ignoro.noe, by no means certain. Josephus says it stood c11pable of the widest latitude of interpreta- over age.inst (or opposite) the temple, which tion, and the other, though written in n is highly probable; but this still leaves the language of which we have o. more definite question of site open, for the palace would knowledge, was composed by o. person who be jnstly described o.s UVTtr:pvr: •xwv vaov, could never have seen the building he was whether it stood west or south of the describing'' (Fergusson, Diet. I3ib. ii. p.658)], t:o.nctuary. Ewald places it on the opposite with cedar beams [n\n;:.,, cut or hewn ridge of Ophel, i.e., on the south prolonga- beams~ upon the plllars':' (Thia palace, tion of the temple mount; while Fergusson, accordmg to Fergusson, was "the great lliilir, &c., locate it on the north-east side of ball of. st~te and nudience " and the princi- Zion, on the opposite side of the Tyropoean pal building of the range. But if it was valley, and overlooking it and the whole this, which is very doubtful, for the throne city of David. Recent explorations seem to was in the hall of judgment (oh. v. 7), it favour Ewe.Id's view. See "Recovery of would seem to have served other purposes Jerusalem," pp. 319 sqq,, and "Our Work in besides that of o.n audionce-cho.mber. Among Po.Jestine," p. 169 sqq. When we remem- other things, it was certainly o.n armoury ber that the very site of Zion is disputed, it (eh. x. 17. Cf. Ian. xxii. 8). 'l'ho Arab. will ~ot ~urprise the ren.der that questions Vere. calls it "the house of bis arms." of iii.is lmid phould be involved in uncer- l'o~si!Jly it was also the rc:,idcnce of tlti OD, "'11. 1-ul.) THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 125