1 Kings 10:22

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 2 Chronicles 9:21 and designs not

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. At sea - on the Mediterranean.

A navy of Tharshish; either, first, the ships of the sea, which may seem to be called Tarshish, as , 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 ,10 66:19 ; 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.

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.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 Jonah 1:3; for Tarshish was the son of Javan, 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.] No oftener, as trading with many nations in Africa, Asia, and Europe. 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.

(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 Genesis 10:4 as among the descendants of Javan, the son of Japhet, which probably points to a European position; (b) in some other places (Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 23:6; Isaiah 23:10; Isaiah 23:14; Ezekiel 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 Jonah 1:3; Jonah 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 Ezekiel 27:12. But the phrase “ships of Tarshish” appears to have become a technical phrase for ships of large size (see Isaiah 2:17; Jeremiah 10:9; Psalms 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 2 Chronicles 9:21 (as also afterwards, in 2 Chronicles 20:36) it is expressly said that the fleet “went to Tarshish.” But the difficulty of this view lies in this—that 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 tôka. (If the ordinary reading, shen habbîm, 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 habnîm, “ivory [and] ebony,” should be accepted, especially as we find those two words used together in Ezekiel 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.

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; "1 Kings 9:28". Apes] קפים kophim; probably a species of monkey rather than ape.

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. 1 Kings 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 ἐντῇΤαρσικῇλεγομένῃθαλάττῃ ‘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 1 Kings 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 1 Kings 10:22 is inserted great part of the substance of that long omission noticed above from 1 Kings 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.

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, 1 Kings 9:26) must therefore have imported very large quantities of that metal.

22. Once in three years came the navy of Tarshish — This navy need not be identified with that which was built at Ezion-geber, (1 Kings 9:26,) for Solomon probably had many fleets that sailed on many seas.