Poole on 1 Kings 7:13-17: The Brazen Pillars, Jachin and Boaz (Part 1)

Verse 13:[1]  And king Solomon sent and fetched (2 Chron. 4:11, Huram;[2] see verse 40[3]) Hiram out of Tyre.

Verse 14:[4]  (2 Chron. 2:14) He was a widow’s son (Heb. the son of a widow woman[5]) of the tribe of Naphtali, and (2 Chron. 4:16) his father was a man of Tyre, a worker in brass:  and (Ex. 31:3; 36:1) he was filled with wisdom, and understanding, and cunning to work all works in brass.  And he came to king Solomon, and wrought all his work.

[Of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, with a father of Tyre]  But in 2 Chronicles 2:14 his mother was of the tribe of Dan.  How do these things agree?  Responses:  1.  The King of Tyre erred (which is not at all strange) in the assigning of the Israelite tribe (Sanchez).  2.  She was a woman of Dan, but a widow of Naphtali (Grotius).  3.  Dan here is not the name of the tribe, but of a city in the tribe of Naphtali.  See Adrichomius, Theater of the Holy Land 37 (Menochius).  4.  Her mother was of the tribe of Dan, as it is said in 2 Chronicles 2:14, and her father of the tribe of Naphtali, who nevertheless is called a Tyrian by habitation (just as the Levite Obed-edom is called a Gittite[6] (Martyr), and Paul of Tarsus[7] (Lapide), and by training of art (Tirinus out of Lapide).  Hiram had a Tyrian teacher/master (Menochius).  These words, of the tribe of Naphtali, are not to be referred to the nearest name, widow:  but to the more remote name, son.  I translate it, born of the tribe of Naphtali (Piscator).

A widow’s son of the tribe of Naphtali.  Objection:  She was one of the daughters of Dan, 2 Chronicles 2:14.  Answer:  So indeed Hiram king of Tyre there affirms; but he might easily mistake or be misinformed, especially being no Israelite, nor a careful observer of the distinction of tribes.  Or she might be of Dan by her father, and of Naphtali by her mother, or by her husband, who was of that tribe, and therefore she was truly a widow of Naphtali.  His father was a man of Tyre; either by his descent, being a Tyrian by birth; or by education and habitation, he or his father being given to the study of these arts, and having planted themselves at Tyre for their improvement therein.  However that was, it was a singular providence of God, that there was at that time so excellent a workman fit for so great and glorious works.  All works in brass, and of gold, and stone, and purple, and blue, etc., as is affirmed, 2 Chronicles 2:14.  But only his skill in brass is here mentioned, because he speaks only of the brazen things which he made.

Verse 15:[8]  For he cast (Heb. fashioned[9]) (2 Kings 25:17; 2 Chron. 3:15; 4:12; Jer. 52:21) two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece:  and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about.

He cast two pillars of brass; of which see 2 Kings 25:16, 17; Jeremiah 52:21.

[Of eighteen cubits of height]  But in 2 Chronicles 3:15 these pillars were of thirty-five cubits.  What is to be said!  Response 1:  The shaft, which is properly called the pillar, was of eighteen cubits.  To these add the chapiters, bases, lilies, etc.; they will easily reach thirty-five cubits (Tostatus and Cajetan and Villalpando in Sanchez, similarly Lyra, Martyr).  This does not satisfy:  1.  because in Chronicles, after those thirty-five cubits, five more are reckoned for the chapiters (Sanchez).  2.  There is no proportion, that the height of those might be nearly equal to the column itself (Lapide).  Response 2:  Those thirty-five cubits in Chronicles are to be understood of both columns (Sanchez out of Vatablus and Ribera and Mariana, Lapide out of Villalpando and Salian, Menochius, Tirinus).  You will say; thus in Chronicles they would not be thirty-five, but thirty-six.  Answers:  1.  Here it was of eighteen cubits, that is, more or less:  for Sacred Scripture does not attend to precise quantity, measure, and number (Vatablus).  Somewhat was wanting (Grotius):  but no account is taken of the small number.  Here eighteen cubits are said to have been:  but they were exactly seventeen and a half, just as the writer of Chronicles explains, whose intention it was either to add or to explain those things that in the books of Kings either were omitted or were related more obscurely (Sanchez).  2.  A half cubit of each column was inserted into its chapiter, and, hidden in that, it was not appearing (Vatablus and Ribera in Lapide).  3.  The individual columns with their bases were seventeen and a half cubits, with the plinth excluded (now, the plinth was the lowest part of the base), which makes up eighteen.  But this is the reason for the exclusion of the plinth, that the rest of the column with its base was hollow (which we learn out of Jeremiah 52:21 [Munster]); for this reason it was necessary that it be placed upon a solid plinth, and so the plinth be cast separately from the column (Lapide).  Response 3:  These were eighteen sacred cubits; that is, thirty-six common cubits:  but with the base excluded, which was of one common cubit in height, which makes up the thirty-sixth cubit (Piscator out of Junius).

Of eighteen cubits high apiece.  Objection:  They are said to be thirty-five cubits high, 2 Chronicles 3:15.  Answer:  That place manifestly speaks of both the pillars; and this of each, or one pillar, as it is in the Hebrew.  Objection:  But then it should have been thirty-six cubits.  Answer:  Either the odd half cubit is swallowed up either in the top of the chapiter, or in the bottom of the basis of each pillar; or it is neglected in the account, as commonly small measures or numbers are.

[A line of twelve cubits]  And so the diameter, or the measuring line, was about four cubits:  for the proportion from the circumference to the diameter is nearly threefold (Vatablus, similarly Junius, Piscator, Mariana).  But Villalpando, and out of him Salian, maintain that both columns joined together had these twelve cubits, and that each had only six; for symmetry requires this, that what was eighteen cubits high would only be six cubits round.  But these things hinder, 1.  that to each column these twelve cubits are attributed both by Josephus,[10] and by Jeremiah, Jeremiah 52:21, a fillet of twelve cubits did compass it, that is, one column (Lapide).  (But the it is able to be referred to שֵׁנִי, which signifies either[11] [Menochius].)  2.  Therefore, these were not so much pillars, fashioned to architectural proportion (for neither were they sustaining any weight [Sanchez]), as massive structures erected for the magnificence and fortification of the Temple; of which sort were the pillars of Trajan[12] and Antoninus.[13]  3.  Former architects were observing different proportion than later ones.  4.  In the proportion was regarded the thickness, not so much of the circumference as of the diameter:  Therefore, while the pillar was eighteen cubits tall, and only four cubits thick, this proportion appears sufficiently just.  5.  The pillar was twenty-three cubits tall, of which eighteen belonged to the shaft and five to the chapiter (Lapide).

[It was going around each pillar (thus Vatablus) [these words stand with the preceding in the Hebrew in this way:]  וְחוּט֙ שְׁתֵּים־עֶשְׂרֵ֣ה אַמָּ֔ה יָסֹ֖ב אֶת־הָעַמּ֥וּד הַשֵּׁנִֽי׃]  And a line of twelve cubits was compassing the second pillar (Pagnine, Montanus), or, was going around the thickness of the other pillar (Munster), or, was able to measure its circuit (Strigelius), or, was compassing either (English), the second, understanding also the first; for the width of each was the same (Osiander).  Which a line, etc., was compassing, as the second column (Junius and Tremellius). And a line, etc., was going around it; and thus he did for the second pillar (Jonathan, similarly the Syriac, Arabic, Septuagint in Lapide).

Line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about; so the diameter was four cubits, which, considering the chapiter of five cubits added to the height of each pillar, 2 Chronicles 3:14, was not unproportionable to the height.

Verse 16:[14]  And he made two chapiters of molten brass, to set upon the tops of the pillars:  the height of the one chapiter was five cubits, and the height of the other chapiter was five cubits…

[Two chapiters (thus Jonathan, Pagnine, Montanus, Syriac, Arabic), ‎כֹתָרֹת]  Crownings; that is, architraves (Vatablus, Junius), the parts of which were three, the capitulum,[15] the abacus,[16] and the corona[17] (Junius, Piscator).  Spherical architraves (Tigurinus), capitals (Munster).  The small capital here is a round mass after the manner of a sphere, which completes the work, and rests upon the architraves (Sanchez).

[Castings of brass, ‎מֻצַ֣ק נְחֹ֑שֶׁת]  In cast brass (Montanus); cast out of brass (Pagnine, Jonathan, Vatablus).  מִן/from is understood (Vatablus on verse 15).  Out of cast brass (Syriac, Arabic, Munster, Junius and Tremellius).

[Of five cubits height]  If those three parts are to be comprehended; for the capitulum was of one cubit; the abacus, of one cubit; the corona, of three.  And so, in verse 19, four cubits are attributed to the corona with the abacus; but, in 2 Kings 25:17, three cubits are attributed to the corona alone (Junius, Piscator, Malvenda).  The whole entablature (thus is called that whole adornment that is set upon the pillars) was of five cubits; when elsewhere he says that the small capital was of three cubits, he excluded the corona; when he says that it was of four cubits, he omits the architrave; that is, the beam placed upon the pillars (Menochius).  Of these five cubits, three were adorned with figures, 2 Kings 25:17 (Grotius).

The height of the one chapiter was five cubits.  Objection:  It is but three cubits in 2 Kings 25:17.  Answer:  The word chapiter is taken diversely, as hundreds of other words are; either more largely for the whole, so it is five cubits; or more strictly, either for the pommels, as they are called, 2 Chronicles 4:12, or for the cornice or crown; and so it was but three cubits, to which the pomegranates being added make it four cubits, as it is below, verse 19; and the other work upon it took up one cubit more, which in all made five cubits.

Verse 17:[18]  And nets of checker work, and wreaths of chain work, for the chapiters which were upon the top of the pillars; seven for the one chapiter, and seven for the other chapiter.

[And, as it were, after the manner of a net, and of chains, etc.,שְׂבָכִ֞ים מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה שְׂבָכָ֗ה]  Reticula, small nets (or retiacula, small nets [Montanus], lattices [Munster, Tigurinus, Vatablus), in the workmanship of a net (Pagnine, similarly Munster, Tigurinus, Montanus, Osiander, Vatablus), that is, in the nets and holes of which were pomegranates (Vatablus).  With intricate workmanship (Jonathan), he also made a garland (Syriac).  Upon those he made an engraving of the figure of fruits (Arabic).  In the entwined workmanship of a garland (Junius and Tremellius).  Hebrew:  entanglements in entangled work; that is, the whole small capital was consisting of a garland-like entanglement of flowers, fronds, and fruits intertwining, in four rows, which were encircled with three bands apiece (Junius, Piscator).  These little nets were in the lower and wider part of the corona, which was hanging toward the earth (Villalpando, Menochius).  The capitals of the pillars were round, ornamented with flowers; enclosed with seven intricate nets apiece, not extending downwards from the top, but encircling the capitals from right to left, just as nets are wont to be extended.  The nets’ threads and filaments; that is, the cords, of which the nets were made, were interwoven; that is, twisted with many swelling knots, as it is wont to be done.  And indeed, through six meshes of the nets were appearing the flowers of the capitals.  But the bellies of the capitals; that is, in which part the capitals swell to the greatest extent, which is the middle part of them, were having along the circumference two rows of pomegranates apiece, in such a way that the individual capitals were having two hundred pomegranates standing out throughout the midst of the nets over against the belly (Castalio).

[And of chains, etc., ‎גְּדִלִים֙ מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה שַׁרְשְׁר֔וֹת לַכֹּ֣תָרֹ֔ת [19]]  And girdles (or ribbons [Munster], bands [Junius and Tremellius], cords [Montanus, Pagnine, Vatablus]) in workmanship bound together (Tigurinus) (or of chains [Pagnine, Montanus, thus Junius and Tremellius]) for the garlands (Montanus, Junius and Tremellius, similarly Jonathan), or for the chapiters (Pagnine, similarly Munster), on the capitals (Tigurinus).

For the chapiters, which those nets and wreaths did encompass, either covering, and as it were receiving and holding, the pomegranates, or being mixed with them.

[Seven nets of lines on one chapiter, ‎שִׁבְעָה֙ לַכֹּתֶ֣רֶת הָאֶחָ֔ת]  Seven (understanding, lines interwoven, or nets [Vatablus]) to one corona, or garland (Montanus, Junius and Tremellius), with the rows of the fruit garlands, and of the bands or filaments included (Junius, Piscator).  Each net has, as it were, seven lines, or bands, or strips latticed with each other, and between the latticed openings were the pomegranates (Menochius).  I think that the nets were separated from the chapiters, and were not so brought out or formed from the brass of the chapiters, as if belonging to them, but rather introduced from the outside, and attached, as something foreign; just as, for example, a net placed on a human head, for I read that the chapiters were covered by the nets in 1 Kings 7:18, 42, and again in 2 Kings 25:17 (Sanchez).

[1] Hebrew:  ‎וַיִּשְׁלַח֙ הַמֶּ֣לֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹ֔ה וַיִּקַּ֥ח אֶת־חִירָ֖ם מִצֹּֽר׃

[2] 2 Chronicles 4:11:  “And Huram (‎חוּרָם) made the pots, and the shovels, and the basons.  And Hiram (‎חִירָם/Hiram [Kethib], ‎חוּרָם/Huram [Qere]) finished the work that he was to make for king Solomon for the house of God…”

[3] 1 Kings 7:40:  “And Hirom (‎חִירוֹם) made the lavers, and the shovels, and the basons.  So Hiram (‎חִירָם) made an end of doing all the work that he made king Solomon for the house of the Lord…”

[4] Hebrew: ‎בֶּן־אִשָּׁה֩ אַלְמָנָ֙ה ה֜וּא מִמַּטֵּ֣ה נַפְתָּלִ֗י וְאָבִ֣יו אִישׁ־צֹרִי֘ חֹרֵ֣שׁ נְחֹשֶׁת֒ וַ֠יִּמָּלֵא אֶת־הַחָכְמָ֤ה וְאֶת־הַתְּבוּנָה֙ וְאֶת־הַדַּ֔עַת לַעֲשׂ֥וֹת כָּל־מְלָאכָ֖ה בַּנְּחֹ֑שֶׁת וַיָּבוֹא֙ אֶל־הַמֶּ֣לֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹ֔ה וַיַּ֖עַשׂ אֶת־כָּל־מְלַאכְתּֽוֹ׃

[5] Hebrew:  ‎בֶּן־אִשָּׁה֩ אַלְמָנָ֙ה.

[6] 2 Samuel 6:10, 11; 1 Chronicles 13:13, 14; 15:18, 24; 16:5, 38; 26:4-8.

[7] Acts 9:11; 11:25.

[8] Hebrew: ‎וַיָּ֛צַר אֶת־שְׁנֵ֥י הָעַמּוּדִ֖ים נְחֹ֑שֶׁת שְׁמֹנֶ֙ה עֶשְׂרֵ֜ה אַמָּ֗ה קוֹמַת֙ הָעַמּ֣וּד הָאֶחָ֔ד וְחוּט֙ שְׁתֵּים־עֶשְׂרֵ֣ה אַמָּ֔ה יָסֹ֖ב אֶת־הָעַמּ֥וּד הַשֵּׁנִֽי׃

[9] Hebrew:  ‎וַיָּצַר.

[10] Antiquities 8:3:4.

[11] 1 Kings 7:15:  “For he cast two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece: and a line of twelve cubits did compass either column (‎אֶת־הָעַמּ֥וּד הַשֵּׁנִֽי׃).”

[12] In 113 AD, Trajan (emperor from 98 to 117) erected a pillar in Trajan’s Forum, Rome, to commemorate his victory in the Dacian Wars.  It is a spiral column, one hundred and twenty-five feet tall, made of marble.  On the outside is a spiral frieze, detailing the story of the Dacian campaigns; on the inside is a spiral staircase leading to a viewing platform on top.  It stands to the present day.

[13] In 161 AD, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus erected a tall marble column (about forty-eight feet) in honor of their adoptive father, Antoninus Pious (emperor from 138 to 161), at Campus Martius, Rome.  Compared to Trajan’s Column, the Column of Antoninus Pius was small and plain.  It was destroyed in the Middle Ages.

[14] Hebrew: ‎וּשְׁתֵּ֙י כֹתָרֹ֜ת עָשָׂ֗ה לָתֵ֛ת עַל־רָאשֵׁ֥י הָֽעַמּוּדִ֖ים מֻצַ֣ק נְחֹ֑שֶׁת חָמֵ֣שׁ אַמּ֗וֹת קוֹמַת֙ הַכֹּתֶ֣רֶת הָאֶחָ֔ת וְחָמֵ֣שׁ אַמּ֔וֹת קוֹמַ֖ת הַכֹּתֶ֥רֶת הַשֵּׁנִֽית׃

[15] That is, the decorative top of each pillar.

[16] That is, a flat plate on top of the capitula.

[17] That is, the projecting molding on the top.

[18] Hebrew: ‎שְׂבָכִ֞ים מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה שְׂבָכָ֗ה גְּדִלִים֙ מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה שַׁרְשְׁר֔וֹת לַכֹּ֣תָרֹ֔ת אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־רֹ֣אשׁ הָעַמּוּדִ֑ים שִׁבְעָה֙ לַכֹּתֶ֣רֶת הָאֶחָ֔ת וְשִׁבְעָ֖ה לַכֹּתֶ֥רֶת הַשֵּׁנִֽית׃

[19] גְּדִלִים, twisted threads, is related to the verbal root גָּדַל, to grow or become great.