This stand-alone passage discusses some financial negotiations between Kings Hiram and Solomon taking place during the construction of the Temple. Despite the brevity of the passage which appears to interrupt the main story, numerous problems arise in attempting to understand it. These include contradictions with the parallel account in II Chronicles, the meaning of the place-name Cabul, why Hiram was dissatisfied with the deal, the value of the gold Hiram gave Solomon, how the account reflects on the character of Solomon, the meaning of the term 'brother,' whether this was intended as an etiological (i.e. explaining the origin of a name or practice) narrative, and whether v. 14 is misplaced in the account. Most of these issues will be briefly discussed below.
However, there is an additional interesting fact concerning which I have yet to read any comments in the scholarly literature. So I will leave it up to the reader as an exercise to ponder over. Namely, is there any significance to the many times the number two appears in this short passage (“twenty” in v. 10a; “two” in 10b; “twenty in v. 11”; and “one hundred and twenty” in v. 14)?
Since some of the writers cited below comment on more than one of the many questions this passage invokes, some of those given below may not be strictly presented according to the stated topics.
“Brother”
Concerning the fact that Hiram calls Solomon his “brother,” Cogan says it is “a term common in diplomatic parlance, expressing the relationship between parties of equal status, often formalized in treaty.”
But Hamilton suggests a possibly broader definition of the term: Hiram, king of Tyre, called Solomon his brother (I Kgs 9:13). Brother may, in such an instance, be a covenant term (note that Hiram 'was on friendly terms with ['loved,' NIV] David,' I Kgs 5:15).” And the NIV translation prepares us for the following comment:
House: “Solomon and Hiram's friendship lasts as long as both men live...These verses express the strength of the alliance's bonds, for Solomon is not presented in a favorable way here...This episode shows a conniving side of Solomon. Readers may wonder whether he is completely trustworthy. Still, Hiram continues to work with Solomon (cf. 9:26-28).”
Value of the Gold
It is sometimes difficult to pin down exactly the worth of gold in ancient times and express it in modern equivalences.
Wakely states: “Much of the gold used in the construction process [for the temple] was obtained through the taxation of caravans and through profits from state monopolies or franchises (I Kgs. 10:15). Some was acquired by ceding twenty cities in Galilee to Hiram, king of Tyre, who paid 120 talents (about 4.5 tons) of gold (9:10-14).”
For comparison purposes, I Kings 10:14 indicates that the yearly tribute Solomon received from his regions amounted to 666 talents of gold. (Shepherd)
As to the worth of 120 talents, Stinespring says that “the value of a gold talent has been roughly estimated at thirty thousand dollars.” If that estimate is correct, then the gold Hiram had sent to Solomon for his building projects amounted to 3.6 million dollars.
A footnote in the Living Bible similarly values the gold at $3.5 million. On the other hand, LaSor calculates it to be about $5 million.
As to the placement of the mention of gold in v. 14, Cogan treats it as “a footnote referring back to v. 11a, where an unspecified amount of gold is first mentioned.”
Cabul, or Kabul
Perhaps the biggest bone of contention in this passage concerns the exact meaning of this obscure Hebrew term, which appears to be a derogatory one used by Hiram when he inspected the region of the twenty cities he had obtained.
Various English translations attempt to handle this problems different ways:
NRSV provides a footnote stating: “perhaps meaning a land good for nothing.”
NEB footnote reads: “sterile land.”
The Living Bible translates the term as “The Wasteland.”
And The Message calls it “backwoods hick towns.”
TEV provides additional information by stating: “The name sounds like 'ke-bal,' the Hebrew for 'worthless'.” And NIV alludes to the same derivation of the word.
Stinespring treats this passage as “an interlude; a story told to explain the origin of a name. The meaning Cabut is not known; 'like nothing' is as good a conjecture as any.”
Similarly, Motyer identifies the region in question as “a border city in the tribal location of Asher (Jos. xix. 27), situated 10 miles north-east of Carmel The ironic use in 1 Ki ix. 13 probably rests on a popular etymology signifying 'as nothing' (Heb kebal).”
On the other hand, in light of its location, “Montgomery (following LXX [i.e. the ancient Greek translation]) suggests 'border' (Heb. gebul) or 'march-land'.” (Martin) And in the same vein, LaSor explains: “A popular etymology has been suggested meaning 'like nothing', but this once-accepted explanation is now questioned.”
One factor causing this majority opinion to be questioned is expressed by Cogan: “Hiram's dissatisfaction with the conveyance is inexplicable for, whatever the root meaning of Cabul may be, the district can hardly be considered to have been poor, with its cities and the fertile agricultural land of the plain of Acco...Perhaps the deprecatory remark may be taken as the editor's intending to counteract (or at least soften) the negative political implications of the loss of Israelite territory to Hiram.”
Since verses 10-14 appear to be a stand-alone literary unit which the surrounding narrative could have probably done without, it is often treated as an independent etiological story (i.e. one told to explain the origin of a name or custom). But working against that assumption, is the comment of Cogan, who points out, “Unlike the typical name-etiology, in which the name is usually etymologized (cf. Exod 2:10; 1 Sam 1:20; 4:21-22), in the present instance, Cabul is not explained and remains inexplicable.”
Kings and Chronicles
Lastly, we have to consider the differences between the parallel accounts in Kings and Chronicles. As LaSor writes, “This passage has caused much difficulty, particularly in the light of the parallel in Chronicles.”
I will begin with an overview of the subject by Williamson: “Earlier scholars who thought that both Kings and Chronicles drew independently on a common source had little difficulty in harmonizing this apparent discrepancy, the commonest suggestion being that Hiram released the cities to Solomon (so that Chronicles retains the sequel to the Kings accord), either because he was not satisfied with them, or because all along the intention had been to pay in gold, so that the cities 'may have been collateral until the time when payment could be made in gold' (Myers). The assumption of an independent source common to both Kings and Chronicles has now been generally abandoned however...it would be generally agreed today that in a case such as this the Chronicler was working from some form of the text of Kings. Consequently, most scholars argue that the Chronicler was embarrassed by the story in Kings; it is thought he would not have approved of Solomon parting with any of the land of Israel or have found credible the suggestion that Solomon was so short of money as to have to 'sell' territory in this way.”
“The entire Cabul passage is rewritten in 2 Chr 8:1-2, where it is Hiram who transfers the cities to Solomon, but this is a face-saving measure conceived by the Chronicler, for whom it was inconceivable that Solomon would have pawned part of the Promised Land.” (Cogan) Mabie similarly notes the impropriety of Solomon ceding part of Asher's territory – 'Yahweh's land' – to Hiram.
Knoppers also comments on II Chronicles 8:1-2, which says that 'Solomon rebuilt the cities that Hiram had given to him, and settled the people of Israel in them' – “This reflects a remarkable reversal of the tradition recorded in 1 Kings 9:11-13.”
What actually happened?
Due to the many uncertainties in this passage (some of which are given above), scholars have a hard time agreeing on what actually happened in the financial transaction between Hiram and Solomon as described in I Kings 9:10-14 and its parallel in II Chronicles. Below are a few attempts to make sense of the passage:
“According to 2 Ch. 8:2 Hiram gave the land to Solomon, interpreted by some to mean that Hiram was displeased with it and returned it.” (LaSor)
“On the historical side, Hiram's supplying of timber is irrelevant; Solomon had paid for that ([I Kings] 5:11). It would seem that Solomon was in financial difficulties and was forced to cede twenty cities to Hiram for a cash consideration.” (Stinespring)
“Solomon's indebtedness, indicated by his attempt to pay Hiram of Tyre by ceding him twenty cities (I Kings 9:10-14), suggests that the taxes in his realm may have been high, since the debts that they were designed to cover were great. Solomon's economic woes may have contributed to his loss of hegemony over Edom and Aram (I Kings 11:14-25) and the loss of Israel that followed (I Kings 11:26-43).” (Cogan)
Posts
