1 Kings 4 Study Notes

4:1-34 This chapter gives an accurate description of Solomon’s bureaucratic structure, but not for one particular time. Any person of fame, from any time in Solomon’s reign, could be included since such people, by their stature and fame, showed Solomon’s glory. Further, in showing Solomon’s glory, they also glorified God, who gave such glory to Solomon. This structure totally bypassed the traditional tribal structures of the nation and replaced them with officials who were directly responsible to the king, with no loyalty to the ancient tribes and clans.

4:2 Azariah, the grandson of Zadok, was high priest at a later time in Solomon’s rule though not at the very end of his rule (1Ch 6:8-10).

4:3 Though our knowledge of some terms is incomplete, secretaries could have been the heads of the royal scribes dealing with day-to-day matters. The historian might have been the keeper of the royal archives or chronicles.

4:4 The two competing high priests at the time of Solomon’s coronation, Zadok and Abiathar, are both mentioned, though Abiathar was sent into exile almost immediately.

4:5 Deputies could have been the head officers of the military and bureaucratic forces garrisoned around the country and throughout the empire as well as the officers over forced labor levies (v. 6). Since the word adviser literally means “friend,” this term probably referred to a close, intimate adviser to the king.

4:6 The official in charge of the palace may have administered other properties of the king as well. On forced labor, see note at 5:13-18.

4:7 The following verses list the twelve appointed deputies, each of whom provided food for the royal household for one month of the year. There was no provision for the intercalary periods, which are days inserted into the calendar in order to compensate for the fact that the astronomical year is twelve lunar months plus a fraction of a month. These regions were not of equal size and wealth, and Judah is not included (see note at v. 19); therefore, this system probably created unfair burdens. Solomon certainly had other sources of revenue such as royally sponsored mercantile enterprises and tribute from subject nations or territories in his empire.

4:8 The hill country of Ephraim was roomy, but the settlement and economic development of Ephraim began in earnest only with the Hebrew conquest (see Jos 17:14-18). Therefore the large area assigned to Ben-hur might not have indicated a lighter burden since it might not have been fully productive.

4:9-10 One noted city, Beth-shemesh, plus three obscure names could indicate that Ben-deker administered a rather small region that likely found it a relatively heavy burden to provide “for the king and his household” (v. 7). The district controlled by Ben-hesed was about the same size, but it included some productive coastal plains and the fertile Shephelah region.

4:11 Ben-abinadab was one of two deputies married to daughters of Solomon (see v. 15). His region included some coastal plains but was dominated by southern slopes of the Carmel range.

4:12 The district of Baana included several cities on trade routes that opened into the Plain of Esdraelon. For cities of such wealth, making a one-month provision for Solomon was a relatively light burden.

4:13-14 Ben-geber’s district in the northern Transjordan, with its sixty great cities, was large enough that the financial burden could have been relatively light. A second district around Mahanaim would have been relatively small and therefore more heavily burdened. A third in Transjordan (v. 19) is too vaguely defined for comment.

4:15-18 Each of these four districts consisted of the territory of one of Israel’s smaller tribes; thus, these were probably heavily burdened.

4:19 In the Hebrew text, Judah is not included in this burden. The CSB follows the LXX in including a comment on Judah in this verse, although Judah was not one of the twelve districts. The Hebrew version of this comment could be construed as saying that each district had a single official. While some of the evaluations of burden given above are not proven, it is difficult to find a fair distribution of the financial burden in these districts.

4:20 This blissful picture of prosperity indicated that since Solomon’s rule brought prosperity to the entire nation, the responsibility of supporting Solomon’s government and luxury was not as crippling a burden as it otherwise would have been.

4:21 The general extent of Solomon’s empire included Hebrew tribal territories along with Moab and Edom, most or all of the old Philistine territories (but see 9:16), and most or all of the Aramean kingdoms west of the Euphrates River but not the Phoenician coastal cities. Not all of these regions were dominated to the same degree. Some authorities suggest that Philistia, except for Gezer, may actually have been under Egyptian control. This conflicts with the identification of Solomon’s southern border as reaching to Gaza (4:24). But even that border indicated that Pharaoh Siamun may have moved the Egyptian boundary from the Wadi Arish north to the Wadi Besor, just south of Gaza.

4:22-23 Though methods of analysis are proximate, the large quantities provided for Solomon’s provisions for one day were far more than the expected needs of his palace in Jerusalem. Calculated at a pint of grain per day per person, the grain was sufficient for more than twenty thousand persons. Likewise the meat supply easily fed twenty thousand people, even when assuming that the livestock were relatively scrawny animals and each person ate an excessive figure of one pound of meat per day. In fact these quantities could be adequate not just for the needs of Solomon’s palace, but also for the bureaucracy and the permanent resident military. Verses 27-28 hint that these provisions were possibly shared with the military establishment, though the link is unclear.

4:24-25 The north-south range of Solomon’s dominion indicated here correlates with v. 21 on the north since Tiphsah was located on the Euphrates River, but in the south, Gaza was somewhat north of the Wadi Arish, the traditional border of Egypt (see note at v. 21). Solomon’s control over this large region guaranteed the Israelites a degree of peace and security.

4:26 The writer then presents the major innovation of Solomon’s military, a standing army of chariots. David did not use chariots. Two factors indicate that Solomon’s chariot force was not a native Hebrew force. First, developing a home-grown chariot force was an expensive process involving years of training; hiring mercenaries was quicker. Second, Solomon’s chariot armies disappeared in the conflict at Solomon’s death, a likely clue that the charioteers returned to their native lands.

Ancient literature often used numbers symbolically, and so readers rightly ask in a given passage whether the numbers are meant to be literal. Taking the numbers as literal here and using the data from Chronicles, the following situation emerges. There were 1,400 chariots (10:26), an adequate number for a small empire with no competition from the great empires, twelve thousand handlers for horses (probably including both the chariot warriors and the other support personnel for the horses), and facilities for housing and caring for forty thousand horses. The figure about the massive number of horses and the facilities for housing them is reasonable if the horses were scattered throughout the empire and in several different facilities, as would make strategic sense. No single facility in ancient times could house forty thousand horses. The Septuagint at 2Ch 9:25 gives a variant figure of four thousand, a reasonable figure for the facilities actually mobilized at any given time. First Kg 4:28 indicates that horse provisions, probably for the army at large, were also part of the levies, but not necessarily included in the listed provisions above (vv. 7-19).

4:27-28 These verses connect to vv. 7-19 and elaborate on the effective taxation system.

4:29-34 Solomon’s extraordinary wisdom is celebrated. Three of the four names listed here also appear in 1Ch 2:6, and a fourth is very close. In harmonizing these two lists, Mahol (lit “dance”) may represent a professional or guild title, while the Chronicles passage may present actual parentage. These may have been wise men of reputation from a different era. Solomon’s reputation for wisdom transcended international and chronological boundaries.