The chronicler’s history of Solomon is constructed on the same principles
as that of David, and for similar reasons. The builder of the first Temple
commanded the grateful reverence of a community whose national and
religious life centred in the second Temple. While the Davidic king became
the symbol of the hope of Israel, the Jews could not forget that this
symbol derived much of its significance from the widespread dominion and
royal magnificence of Solomon. The chronicler, indeed, attributes great
splendour to the court of David, and ascribes to him a lion’s share in the
Temple itself. He provided his successor with treasure and materials and
even the complete plans, so that on the principle, “Qui facit per alium,
facit per se,” David might have been credited with the actual building.
Solomon was almost in the position of a modern engineer who puts together
a steamer that has been built in sections. But, with all these
limitations, the clear and obvious fact remained that Solomon actually
built and dedicated the Temple. Moreover, the memory of his wealth and
grandeur kept a firm hold on the popular imagination; and these
conspicuous blessings were received as certain tokens of the favour of
Jehovah.
Solomon’s fame, however, was threefold: he was not only the Divinely
appointed builder of the Temple and, by the same Divine grace, the richest
and most powerful king of Israel: he had also received from Jehovah the
gift of “wisdom and knowledge.” In his royal splendour and his sacred
buildings he only differed in degree from other kings; but in his wisdom
he stood alone, not only without equal, but almost without competitor.
Herein he was under no obligation to his father, and the glory of Solomon
could not be diminished by representing that he had been anticipated by
David. Hence the name of Solomon came to symbolise Hebrew learning and
philosophy.
In religious significance, however, Solomon cannot rank with David. The
dynasty of Judah could have only one representative, and the founder and
eponym of the royal house was the most important figure for the subsequent
theology. The interest that later generations felt in Solomon lay apart
from the main line of Jewish orthodoxy, and he is never mentioned by the
prophets.(194)
Moreover, the darker aspects of Solomon’s reign made more impression upon
succeeding generations than even David’s sins and misfortunes. Occasional
lapses into vice and cruelty might be forgiven or even forgotten; but the
systematic oppression of Solomon rankled for long generations in the
hearts of the people, and the prophets always remembered his wanton
idolatry. His memory was further discredited by the disasters which marked
the close of his own reign and the beginning of Rehoboam’s. Centuries
later these feelings still prevailed. The prophets who adapted the Mosaic
law for the closing period of the monarchy exhort the king to take warning
by Solomon, and to multiply neither horses, nor wives, nor gold and
silver.(195)
But as time went on Judah fell into growing poverty and distress, which
came to a head in the Captivity, and were renewed with the Restoration.
The Jews were willing to forget Solomon’s faults in order that they might
indulge in fond recollections of the material prosperity of his reign.
Their experience of the culture of Babylon led them to feel greater
interest and pride in his wisdom, and the figure of Solomon began to
assume a mysterious grandeur, which has since become the nucleus for
Jewish and Mohammedan legends. The chief monument of his fame in Jewish
literature is the book of Proverbs, but his growing reputation is shown by
the numerous Biblical and apocryphal works ascribed to him. His name was
no doubt attached to Canticles because of a feature in his character which
the chronicler ignores. His supposed authorship of Ecclesiastes and of the
Wisdom of Solomon testifies to the fame of his wisdom, while the titles of
the “Psalms of Solomon” and even of some canonical psalms credit him with
spiritual feeling and poetic power.(196)
When the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach proposes to “praise famous
men,” it dwells upon Solomon’s temple and his wealth, and especially upon
his wisdom; but it does not forget his failings.(197) Josephus celebrates
his glory at great length. The New Testament has comparatively few notices
of Solomon; but these include references to his wisdom,(198) his
splendour,(199) and his temple.(200) The Koran, however, far surpasses the
New Testament in its interest in Solomon; and his name and his seal play a
leading part in Jewish and Arabian magic. The bulk of this literature is
later than the chronicler, but the renewed interest in the glory of
Solomon must have begun before his time. Perhaps, by connecting the
building of the Temple as far as possible with David, the chronicler marks
his sense of Solomon’s unworthiness. On the other hand, there were many
reasons why he should welcome the aid of popular sentiment to enable him
to include Solomon among the ideal Hebrew kings. After all, Solomon had
built and dedicated the Temple; he was the “pious founder,” and the
beneficiaries of the foundation would wish to make the most of his piety.
“Jehovah” had “magnified Solomon exceedingly in the sight of all Israel,
and bestowed upon him such royal majesty as had not been on any king
before him in Israel.”(201) “King Solomon exceeded all the kings of the
earth in riches and wisdom; and all the kings of the earth sought the
presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom, which God had put in his
heart.”(202) The chronicler would naturally wish to set forth the better
side of Solomon’s character as an ideal of royal wisdom and splendour,
devoted to the service of the sanctuary. Let us briefly compare Chronicles
and Kings to see how he accomplished his purpose.
The structure of the narrative in Kings rendered the task comparatively
easy: it could be accomplished by removing the opening and closing
sections and making a few minor changes in the intermediate portion. The
opening section is the sequel to the conclusion of David’s reign; the
chronicler omitted this conclusion, and therefore also its sequel. But the
contents of this section were objectionable in themselves. Solomon’s
admirers willingly forget that his reign was inaugurated by the execution
of Shimei, of his brother Adonijah, and of his father’s faithful minister
Joab, and by the deposition of the high-priest Abiathar. The chronicler
narrates with evident approval the strong measures of Ezra and Nehemiah
against foreign marriages, and he is therefore not anxious to remind his
readers that Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter. He does not, however,
carry out his plan consistently. Elsewhere he wishes to emphasise the
sanctity of the Ark and tells us that “Solomon brought up the daughter of
Pharaoh out of the city of David unto the house that he had built for her,
for he said, My wife shall not dwell in the house of David, king of
Israel, because the places are holy whereunto the ark of the Lord hath
come.”(203)
In Kings the history of Solomon closes with a long account of his numerous
wives and concubines, his idolatry and consequent misfortunes. All this is
omitted by the chronicler; but later on, with his usual inconsistency, he
allows Nehemiah to point the moral of a tale he has left untold: “Did not
Solomon, king of Israel, sin by these things?... Even him did strange
women cause to sin.”(204) In the intervening section he omits the famous
judgment of Solomon, probably on account of the character of the women
concerned. He introduces sundry changes which naturally follow from his
belief that the Levitical law was then in force.(205) His feeling for the
dignity of the chosen people and their king comes out rather curiously in
two minor alterations. Both authorities agree in telling us that Solomon
had recourse to forced labour for his building operations; in fact, after
the usual Eastern fashion from the Pyramids down to the Suez Canal,
Solomon’s temple and palaces were built by the _corvée_. According to the
oldest narrative, he “raised a levy out of all Israel.”(206) This suggests
that forced labour was exacted from the Israelites themselves, and it
would help to account for Jeroboam’s successful rebellion. The chronicler
omits this statement as open to an interpretation derogatory to the
dignity of the chosen people, and not only inserts a later explanation
which he found in the book of Kings, but also another express statement
that Solomon raised his levy of the “strangers that were in the land of
Israel.”(207) These statements may have been partly suggested by the
existence of a class of Temple slaves called Solomon’s servants.
The other instance relates to Solomon’s alliance with Hiram, king of Tyre.
In the book of Kings we are told that “Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities in
the land of Galilee.”(208) There were indeed redeeming features connected
with the transaction; the cities were not a very valuable possession for
Hiram: “they pleased him not”; yet he “sent to the King six score talents
of gold.” However, it seemed incredible to the chronicler that the most
powerful and wealthy of the kings of Israel should either cede or sell any
portion of Jehovah’s inheritance. He emends the text of his authority so
as to convert it into a casual reference to certain cities which Hiram had
given to Solomon.(209)
We will now reproduce the story of Solomon as given by the chronicler.
Solomon was the youngest of four sons born to David at Jerusalem by
Bath-shua, the daughter of Ammiel. Besides these three brothers, he had at
least six other elder brothers. As in the cases of Isaac, Jacob, Judah,
and David himself, the birthright fell to a younger son. In the prophetic
utterance which foretold his birth, he was designated to succeed to his
father’s throne and to build the Temple. At the great assembly which
closed his father’s reign he received instructions as to the plans and
services of the Temple,(210) and was exhorted to discharge his duties
faithfully. He was declared king according to the Divine choice, freely
accepted by David and ratified by popular acclamation. At David’s death no
one disputed his succession to the throne: “All Israel obeyed him; and all
the princes and the mighty men and all the sons likewise of King David
submitted themselves unto Solomon the king.”(211)
His first act after his accession was to sacrifice before the brazen altar
of the ancient Tabernacle at Gibeon. That night God appeared unto him “and
said unto him, Ask what I shall give thee.” Solomon chose wisdom and
knowledge to qualify him for the arduous task of government. Having thus
“sought first the kingdom of God and His righteousness,” all other
things—“riches, wealth, and honour”—were added unto him.(212)
He returned to Jerusalem, gathered a great array of chariots and horses by
means of traffic with Egypt, and accumulated great wealth, so that silver,
and gold, and cedars became abundant at Jerusalem.(213)
He next proceeded with the building of the Temple, collected workmen,
obtained timber from Lebanon and an artificer from Tyre. The Temple was
duly erected and dedicated, the king taking the chief and most conspicuous
part in all the proceedings. Special reference, however, is made to the
presence of the priests and Levites at the dedication. On this occasion
the ministry of the sanctuary was not confined to the course whose turn it
was to officiate, but “all the priests that were present had sanctified
themselves and did not keep their courses; also the Levites, which were
the singers, all of them, even Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons and
their brethren, arrayed in fine linen, with cymbals, and psalteries, and
harps, stood at the east end of the altar, and with them a hundred and
twenty priests sounding with trumpets.”(214)
Solomon’s dedication prayer concludes with special petitions for the
priests, the saints, and the king: “Now therefore arise, O Jehovah Elohim,
into Thy resting-place, Thou and the ark of Thy strength; let Thy priests,
O Jehovah Elohim, be clothed with salvation, and let Thy saints rejoice in
goodness. O Jehovah Elohim, turn not away the face of Thine anointed;
remember the mercies of David Thy servant.”(215)
When David sacrificed at the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite, the
place had been indicated as the site of the future Temple by the descent
of fire from heaven; and now, in token that the mercy shown to David
should be continued to Solomon, the fire again fell from heaven, and
consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of Jehovah
“filled the house of Jehovah,”(216) as it had done earlier in the day,
when the Ark was brought into the Temple. Solomon concluded the opening
ceremonies by a great festival: for eight days the Feast of Tabernacles
was observed according to the Levitical law, and seven days more were
specially devoted to a dedication feast.(217)
Afterwards Jehovah appeared again to Solomon, as He had before at Gibeon,
and told him that this prayer was accepted. Taking up the several
petitions that the king had offered, He promised, “If I shut up heaven
that there be no rain, or if I send pestilence among My people; if My
people, which are called by My name, shall humble themselves, and pray,
and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from
heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. Now Mine
eyes shall be open, and Mine ears attent, unto the prayer that is made in
this place.” Thus Jehovah, in His gracious condescension, adopts Solomon’s
own words(218) to express His answer to the prayer. He allows Solomon to
dictate the terms of the agreement, and merely appends His signature and
seal.
Besides the Temple, Solomon built palaces for himself and his wife, and
fortified many cities, among the rest Hamath-zobah, formerly allied to
David.(219) He also organised the people for civil and military purposes.
As far as the account of his reign is concerned, the Solomon of Chronicles
appears as “the husband of one wife”; and that wife is the daughter of
Pharaoh. A second, however, is mentioned later on as the mother of
Rehoboam; she too was a “strange woman,” an Ammonitess, Naamah by name.
Meanwhile Solomon was careful to maintain all the sacrifices and festivals
ordained in the Levitical law, and all the musical and other arrangements
for the sanctuary commanded by David, the man of God.(220)
We read next of his commerce by sea and land, his great wealth and wisdom,
and the romantic visit of the queen of Sheba.(221)
And so the story of Solomon closes with this picture of royal state,—
“The wealth of Ormus and of Ind,
Or where the gorgeous East with richest hand
Showers on her kings barbaric pearl and gold.”
Wealth was combined with imperial power and Divine wisdom. Here, as in the
case of Plato’s own pupils Dionysius and Dion of Syracuse, Plato’s dream
came true; the prince was a philosopher, and the philosopher a prince.
At first sight it seems as if this marriage of authority and wisdom had
happier issue at Jerusalem than at Syracuse. Solomon’s history closes as
brilliantly as David’s, and Solomon was subject to no Satanic possession
and brought no pestilence upon Israel. But testimonials are chiefly
significant in what they omit; and when we compare the conclusions of the
histories of David and Solomon, we note suggestive differences.
Solomon’s life does not close with any scene in which his people and his
heir assemble to do him honour and to receive his last injunctions. There
are no “last words” of the wise king; and it is not said of him that “he
died in a good old age, full of days, riches, and honour.” “Solomon slept
with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father; and
Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead”(222): that is all. When the
chronicler, the professed panegyrist of the house of David, brings his
narrative of this great reign to so lame and impotent a conclusion, he
really implies as severe a condemnation upon Solomon as the book of Kings
does by its narrative of his sins.
Thus the Solomon of Chronicles shows the same piety and devotion to the
Temple and its ritual which were shown by his father. His prayer at the
dedication of the Temple is parallel to similar utterances of David.
Instead of being a general and a soldier, he is a scholar and a
philosopher. He succeeded to the administrative abilities of his father;
and his prayer displays a deep interest in the welfare of his subjects.
His record—in Chronicles—is even more faultless than that of David. And
yet the careful student with nothing but Chronicles, even without Ezra and
Nehemiah, might somehow get the impression that the story of Solomon, like
that of Cambuscan, had been “left half told.” In addition to the points
suggested by a comparison with the history of David, there is a certain
abruptness about its conclusion. The last fact noted of Solomon, before
the formal statistics about “the rest of his acts” and the years of his
reign, is that horses were brought for him “out of Egypt and out of all
lands.” Elsewhere the chronicler’s use of his materials shows a feeling
for dramatic effect. We should not have expected him to close the history
of a great reign by a reference to the king’s trade in horses.(223)
Perhaps we are apt to read into Chronicles what we know from the book of
Kings; yet surely this abrupt conclusion would have raised a suspicion
that there were omissions, that facts had been suppressed because they
could not bear the light. Upon the splendid figure of the great king, with
his wealth and wisdom, his piety and devotion, rests the vague shadow of
unnamed sins and unrecorded misfortunes. A suggestion of unhallowed
mystery attaches itself to the name of the builder of the Temple, and
Solomon is already on the way to become the Master of the Genii and the
chief of magicians.(224)