Every week, one Greek or Hebrew word changes how you read a familiar passage. Subscribe free →
BibleWord.ai iconBibleWord.ai

Attributed commentary excerpt

John Gill's Exposition on 1 Kings 10:22

A historical reference excerpt for this verse. Read it alongside the biblical text and other available sources.

Exposition of the Old and New Testament
John Gill (1697–1771) · 18th-century historical commentary
Source: BibleWord.ai's local reference edition of this named work.
For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish, with the navy of Hiram, etc.] Tharshish was not the place the navy went from, but whither it went to, as appears from (<140921>2 Chronicles 9:21 20:36) and designs not Tarsus in Cilicia; nor Tartessus in Spain, or Gades, or which was however near it; though it appears from Strabo f246 and Mela f247 that the Phoenicians were acquainted with those parts, and were possessed of them; and particularly, according to Velleius Paterculus f248, the navy of Tyre traded thither before the days of Solomen; and Vitringa f249 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 f250 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 f251 says, he saw in Sumatra, where some place Ophir, one that weighed three hundred and thirty pounds; though, according to the Ethiopians f252 the ivory is from the horns; and so say f253 Pausanias and others, (see <262715>Ezekiel 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 f254, Curtius f255, and Pliny f256 relate; so Virgil f257 speaks of ivory as fetched from India and Horace f258 also, which must be East India, for there are no ivory nor apes in the West Indies f259: “apes” or “monkeys” were then, as now, brought from those parts. Strabo f260 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 f261 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 f262. There are various sorts of apes, some more like to goats, others to dogs, others to lions, and some to other animals, as Philostorgius f263 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 f264 reckons such among apes; but what come nearest in…

This public page shows a contextual excerpt from the locally available source text.

How to use this source
This excerpt is attributed to its named commentary. It is included as a historical study resource and should be evaluated in light of Scripture and other relevant evidence.