Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - 1 Kings 7:27 - 7:27
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Brazen Stands and Their Basins.
(Note: The description which follows will be more easily understood by comparing it with the sketch given in my biblische Archäologie, Taf. iii. fig. 4.)
- He made ten stands of brass, each four cubits long, four cubits broad, and three cubits high. מְכֹנֹות, stands or stools (Luther), is the name given to these vessels from their purpose, viz., to serve as supports to the basins which were used for washing the flesh of the sacrifices. They were square chests cast in brass, of the dimensions given.
1Ki 7:28-29
Their work (their construction) was the following: they had מִסְגְּרֹות, lit., surroundings, i.e., panels of flat sides, and that between שְׁלַבִּים, commissurae, i.e., frames or borders, which enclosed the sides, and were connected together at the angles; and upon the panels within the borders (there were figures of) lions, oxen, and cherubim. The statement in Josephus, that each centre was divided into three compartments, has nothing to support it in the biblical text, nor is it at all probable in itself, inasmuch as a division of this kind would have rendered the figures placed upon them insignificantly small. “And upon the borders was a base above.” כֵּן is a noun, and has been rendered correctly by the Chaldee כַנְתָא, basis. The meaning is, above, over the borders, there was a pedestal for the basin upon the chest, which is more fully described in 1Ki 7:31. To take כֵּן as an adverb does not give a suitable sense. For if we adopt the rendering, and upon the corner borders (or ledges) likewise above (De Wette and Ewald), - i.e., there were also figures of lions, oxen, and cherubim upon the corner borders, - it is impossible to tell what the meaning of מִמַּעַל can be, to say nothing of the fact that on the corner borders there could hardly be room for such figures as these. This last argument also tells against the rendering adopted by Thenius: “and upon the corner borders, above as well as below the lions and oxen, (there were) wreaths;” in which, moreover, it is impossible to attach any supportable meaning to the כֵּן. When, on the other hand, Thenius objects to our view that the pedestal in question is spoken of for the first time in 1Ki 7:31, and that the expression “above the corner borders (ledges)” would be extremely unsuitable, since the pedestal in question was above the whole stand; the former remark is not quite correct, for 1Ki 7:31 merely contains a more minute description of the character of the pedestal, and the latter is answered by the fact that the pedestal derived its strength from the corner borders or ledges. “And below the lions and oxen were wreaths, pendant work.” לֹיֹות, here and at 1Ki 7:36, is to be explained from לִוְיָה in Pro 1:9 and Pro 4:9, and signifies twists or wreaths. מֹורָד מַעֲשֵׂה is not “work of sinking,” i.e., sunken work (Thenius), which never can be the meaning of מֹורָד, but pendant work, festoons, by which, however, we cannot understand festoons hanging freely, or floating in the air.
1Ki 7:30
“Every stool had four brazen wheels and brazen axles, and the four feet thereof had shoulder-pieces; below the basin were the shoulder-pieces cast, beyond each one (were) wreaths.” The meaning is that the square chests stood upon axles with wheels of brass, after the style of ordinary carriage wheels (1Ki 7:33), so that they could be driven or easily moved from one place to another; and that they did not rest directly upon the axles, but stood upon four feet, which were fastened upon the axles. This raised the chest above the rim of the wheels, so that not only were the sides of the chest which were ornamented with figures left uncovered, but, according to 1Ki 7:32, the wheels stood below the panels, and not, as in ordinary carriages, at the side of the chest. With regard to the connection between the axles and the wheels, Gesenius (Thes. p. 972) and Thenius suppose that the axles were fastened to the wheels, as in the Roman plaustra and at the present day in Italy, so as to turn with them; and Thenius argues in support of this, that לָהֶם is to be connected not only with what immediately precedes, but also with נְהֹשֶׁת סַרְנֵי. But this latter is unfounded; and the idea is altogether irreconcilable with the fact that the wheels had naves (חִשֻּׁקִים, 1Ki 7:33), from which we must infer that they revolved upon the axles. The words לָהֶם כְּתֵפֹת פַעֲמֹתָיו וְאַרְבָּעָה are ambiguous.They may either be rendered, “and its four feet had shoulder-pieces,” or, as Thenius supposes, “and its four feet served as shoulder-pieces.” פְּעָמֹת means stepping feet, feet bent out as if for stepping (Exo 25:12). The suffix attached to פעמתיו refers to מְכֹונָה, the masculine being often used indefinitely instead of the feminine, as in לָהֶם in 1Ki 7:28. Thenius compares these feet to the ἁμαξόποδες of the Greeks, and imagines that they were divided below, like fork-shaped upright contrivances, in which, as in forks, the wheels turned with the axles, so that the axle-peg, which projected outwards, had a special apparatus, instead of the usual pin, in the form of a stirrup-like and on the lower side hand-shaped holder (יָד), which was fastened to the lower rim of the מְכֹונָה, and descended perpendicularly so as to cover the foot, and the general arrangement of the wheels themselves received greater strength in consequence. These feet, which were divided in the shape of forks, are supposed to be called כְּתֵפֹת (shoulders), because they were not attached underneath at the edge of the stand, but being cast with the corner rims passed down in the inner angles, so that their uppermost portion was under the basin, and the lowest portion was under the stand, which we are to picture to ourselves as without a bottom, and projecting as a split foot, held the wheel, and so formed its shoulder-pieces. But we cannot regard this representation as either in accordance with the text, or as really correct. Even if לָהֶם כְּתֵפֹת could in any case be grammatically rendered, “they served them (the wheels and axles) as shoulders,” although it would be a very questionable course to take לָהֶם in a different sense here from that which it bears in the perfectly similar construction in 1Ki 7:28, the feet which carried the stand could not possibly be called the shoulders of the wheels and their axles, since they did not carry the wheels, but the מְכֹונָה. Moreover, this idea is irreconcilable with the following words: “below the basin were the shoulder-pieces cast.” If, for example, as Thenius assumes, the mechonah head a cover which was arched like a dome, and had a neck in the centre into which the basin was inserted by its lower rim, the shoulder-pieces, supposing that they were cast upon the inner borders of the chest, would not be below the basin, but simply below the corners of the lid of the chest, so that they would stand in no direct relation whatever to the basin. We must therefore give the preference to the rendering, which is grammatically the most natural one, “and its feet had shoulder-pieces,” and understand the words as signifying that from the feet, which descended of course from the four corner borders of the chest down to the axles, there ascended shoulder-pieces, which ran along the outside of the chest and reached to the lower part of the basin which was upon the lid of the chest, and as shoulders either supported or helped to support it. According to 1Ki 7:34, these shoulder-pieces were so cast upon the four corners of the chest, that they sprang out of it as it were. לֹיֹות אִישׁ מֵעֵבֶר, opposite to each one were wreaths. Where these festoons were attached, the various senses in which מֵעֵבֶר is used prevent our deciding with certainty. At any rate, we must reject the alternation proposed by Thenius, of לֹיֹות into לְאֶחָת, for the simple reason that לְאֶחָת אִישׁ in the sense of “one to the other” would not be Hebraic.
1Ki 7:31-34
In 1Ki 7:31 we have a description of the upper portion of the mechonah, which formed the pedestal for the basin, and therewith an explanation of לַכִּיֹּר מִתַּחַת. “And the mouth of it (the basin) was within the crown and upwards with a cubit, and the mouth of it (the crown) was rounded, stand-work, a cubit and a half (wide), and on its mouth also there was engraved work, and its panels were square, not round.” To understand this verse, we must observe that, according to 1Ki 7:35, the mechonah chest was provided at the top with a dome-shaped covering, in the centre of which there was an elevation resembling the capital of a pillar (הַכֹּתֶרֶת, the crown), supporting the basin, which was inserted into it by its lower rim. The suffix in פִּיהוּ (its mouth) is supposed by Thenius to refer to the mechonah chest, and he questions the allusion to the basin, on the ground that this was so flat that a mouth-like opening could not possibly be spoken of, and the basins were never within the mechonah. But however correct these two remarks may be in themselves, they by no means demonstrate the necessity of taking פִּיהוּ as referring to the mechonah chest. For פֶּה (the mouth) is not necessarily to be understood as denoting a mouth-like opening to the basin; but just as רֹאשׁ פִּי in Exo 28:32 signifies the opening of the clothes for the head, i.e., for putting the head through when putting on the clothes, so may פִּיהוּ (its mouth) be the opening or mouth for the basin, i.e., the opening into which the basin fitted and was emptied, the water in the basin being let off into the mechonah chest through the head-shaped neck by means of a tap or plug. The mouth was really the lower or contracted portion of the shell-shaped basin, which was about a cubit in height within the neck and upwards, that is to say, in all, inasmuch as it went partly into the neck and rose in part above it. The פִּיהָ (the mouth thereof) which follows is the (upper) opening of the crown-like neck of the lid of the mechonah. This was rounded, מַעֲשֵׂה־כֵן, stand-work, i.e., according to De Wette's correct paraphrase, formed after the style of the foot of a pillar, a cubit and a half in diameter. “And also upon the mouth of it (the mechonah) was carved work.” The גַּם (also) refers to the fact that the sides of the mechonah were already ornamented with carving. מִסְגְּרֹתֵיהֶם, the panels of the crown-like neck (כֹּתֶרֶת) and its mouth (פִּיהָ) were square, like the panels of the sides of the mechonah chest. The fact that panels are spoken of in connection with this neck, may be explained on the assumption that with its height of one cubit and its circumference of almost five cubits (which follows from its having a diameter of a cubit and a half) it had stronger borders of brass to strengthen its bearing power, while between them it consisted of thinner plates, which are called fillings or panels. - In 1Ki 7:32, 1Ki 7:33, the wheels are more minutely described. Every stool had four wheels under the panels, i.e., not against the sides of the chest, but under them, and יָדֹות, hands or holders of the wheels, i.e., special contrivances for fastening the wheels to the axles, probably larger and more artistically worked than the linch-pins of ordinary carriages. These יָדֹות were only required when the wheels turned upon the axles, and not when they were fastened to them. The height of the wheel was a cubit and a half, i.e., not half the height, but the whole. For with a half height of a cubit and a half the wheels would have been three cubits in diameter; and as the chest was only four cubits long, the hinder wheels and front wheels would almost have touched one another. The work (construction) of the wheels resembled that of (ordinary) carriage wheels; but everything about them (holders, felloes, spokes, and naves) was cast in brass. - In 1Ki 7:34 the description passes to the upper portion of the mechonah. “And he made four shoulder-pieces at the four corners of one (i.e., of every) stand; out of the stand were its shoulder-pieces.” כְּתֵפֹות are the shoulder-pieces already mentioned in 1Ki 7:30, which were attached to the feet below, or which terminated in feet. They were fastened to the corners in such a way that they seemed to come out of them; and they rose above the corners with a slight inclination (curve) towards the middle of the neck or capital, till they came under the outer rim of the basin which rested upon the capital of the lid of the chest, so as to support the basin, which turned considerably outwards at the top.
1Ki 7:35-36
“And on the upper part of the stand (the mechonah chest) half a cubit high was rounded all round, and on the upper part were its holders, and its panels out of it. הַמְּכֹונָה רֹאשׁ is the upper portion of the square chest. This was not flat, but rounded, i.e., arched, so that the arching rose half a cubit high above the height of the sides. This arched covering (or lid) had יָדֹות, holders, and panels, which were therefore upon the upper part of the מְכֹונָה. The holders we take to be strong broad borders of brass, which gave the lid the necessary firmness; and the fillings or panels are the thinner plates of brass between them. They were both מִמֶּנָּה, “out of it,” out of the upper part of the mechonah, i.e., cast along with it. With regard to the decoration of it, 1Ki 7:36 states that “he cut out (engraved) upon the plates of its holders, and upon its panels, cherubim, lions, and palms, according to the empty space of every one, and wreaths all round.” We cannot determine anything further with regard to the distribution of these figures.
1Ki 7:37-38
“Thus he made the ten stools of one kind of casting, measure, and form, and also ten brazen basins (כִּיֹּרֹות), each holding forty baths, and each basin four cubits.” In a round vessel this can only be understood of the diameter, not of the height or depth, as the basins were set upon (עַל) the stands. עַל־הַמְּכֹונָה אֶחָד כִּיֹּור is dependent upon וַיַּעַשׂ: he made ten basins, ... one basin upon a stand for the ten stands, i.e., one basin for each stand. If then the basins were a cubit in diameter at the top, and therefore their size corresponded almost exactly to the length and breadth of the stand, whilst the crown-like neck, into which they were inserted, was only a cubit and a half in diameter (1Ki 7:31), their shape must have resembled that of widespreading shells. And the form thus given to them required the shoulder-pieces described in 1Ki 7:30 and 1Ki 7:34 as supports beneath the outer rim of the basins, to prevent their upsetting when the carriage was wheeled about.
(Note: The description which Ewald has given of these stands in his Geschichte, iii. pp. 311,312, and still more elaborately in an article in the Göttingen Gelehrten Nachr. 1859, pp. 131-146, is not only obscure, but almost entirely erroneous, since he proposes in the most arbitrary way to make several alterations in the biblical text, on the assumption that the Solomonian stands were constructed just like the small bronze four-wheeled kettle-carriages (hardly a foot in size) which have been discovered in Mecklenburg, Steyermark, and other places of Europe. See on this subject G. C. F. Lisch, “über die ehernen Wagenbecken der Bronzezeit,” in the Jahrbb. des Vereinsf. Mecklenb. Geschichte, ix. pp. 373,374, where a sketch of a small carriage of this kind is given.)
1Ki 7:39
And he put the stands five on the right side of the house and five on the left; and the (brazen) sea he put upon the right side eastwards, opposite to the south. The right side is the south side, and the left the north side. Consequently the stands were not placed on the right and left, i.e., on each side of the altar of burnt-offering, but on each side of the house, i.e., of the temple-hall; while the brazen sea stood farther forward between the hall and the altar, only more towards the south, i.e., to the south-east of the hall and the south-west of the altar of burnt-offering. The basins upon the stands were for washing (according to 2Ch 4:6), namely, “the work of the burnt-offering,” that is to say, for cleansing the flesh and fat, which were to be consumed upon the altar of burnt-offering. By means of the stands on wheels they could not only easily bring the water required near to the priests who were engaged in preparing the sacrifices, but could also let down the dirty water into the chest of the stand by means of a special contrivance introduced for the purpose, and afterwards take it away. As the introduction of carriages for the basins arose from the necessities of the altar-service, so the preparation of ten such stands, and the size of the basins, was occasioned by the greater extension of the sacrificial worship, in which it often happened that a considerable number of sacrifices had to be made ready for the altar at the same time. The artistic work of these stands and their decoration with figures were intended to show that these vessels were set apart for the service of the sanctuary. The emblems are to some extent the same as those on the walls of the sanctuary, viz., cherubim, palms, and flowers, which had therefore naturally the same meaning here as they had there; the only difference being that they were executed there in gold, whereas here they were in brass, to correspond to the character of the court. Moreover, there were also figures of lions and oxen, pointing no doubt to the royal and priestly characters, which were combined, according to Exo 19:6, in the nation worshipping the Lord in this place.