Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: October 11
Today is: Saturday, April 27th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of October: (Show All Months)
The gold delivered by David to Solomon for ornamenting the temple, and for the fabrication of its utensils, was this—as king, he bestowed the savings of his reign, amounting to 100,000 talents, which, at 125 pounds troy (equal to 93 pounds 12 ounces avoirdupois), which is the usual calculation—amounted to 12,500,000 pounds troy. Besides this, he gave, as an individual, out of his private estate, 3000 talents, which, at the same calculation, make 375,000 pounds troy. The nobles also contributed 5000 talents and 10,000 drachms (equal to 52 pounds troy), which, at the above rate, amount to 625,052 pounds troy. This makes the entire amount of gold no less than 13,500,052 pounds troy.
This of gold. The silver was in full proportion. David, as king, bestowed a million of talents, making 125,000,000 pounds troy; to which, as an individual, he added 7000 talents, weighing 875,000 pounds troy. Besides this, the nobles gave 10,000 talents, weighing 1,250,000 pounds troy. This makes the whole quantity of silver 127,125,000 pounds troy.
Such are the quantities of gold and silver set apart by David alone to the service of the temple, without account of any appropriations to the same purpose by Solomon himself. The imagination faints in the attempt to apprehend such inconceivable amounts. But as values are better apprehended than quantities, let us turn these weights into values.
The 13,500,052 pounds of gold, taken at the present value of pure gold, four pounds sterling the ounce, would be equal in value to 648,002,496 l. The silver, at the present price of the unalloyed metal, which is five shillings the ounce, would be no less than 381,375,000 l., making together 1,029,377,496 l. sterling. But that our national debt exits, and is but one fourth less than this amount. the mere idea of such a sum would be inconceivable. Let us look at it closely. To accumulate such a sum during the thirty-three years of his reign over the united kingdom, would have required David and his nobles to lay by above 31,000,000 l. every year, being equal to the entire annual revenue of the greatest realms in Europe, excepting our own.
In a curious and rare book before us, Note: Published in 1722, under the title of “The State of the Greatest King, set forth in the Greatness of Solomon and the Glory of his Reign.” By George Reynolds, Professor of the Mathematics (at Bristol). we meet with this remarkable passage with reference to the vastness of this amount—“I have read a pamphlet, printed about a year and a half before the peace of Utrecht was concluded, which (as it was said) was written by the command of Queen Anne’s ministry, that the subjects might be convinced of the necessity of a peace with France, and among the powerful motives made use of in that pamphlet, one of the strongest was, that the nation was fifty millions of pounds sterling in debt, which the author affirmed was the eighth part of the value of the whole kingdom. If that be true, then there was much above three times the value of this kingdom laid out upon the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem, which was built by Solomon, which is much above the value of two of the best kingdoms in Europe.”
The comparison thus suggested may be pursued upon the more exact materials we now possess. If the above statement be correct, the value of this kingdom, which probably means the value of the real property, has increased in a proportion scarcely less astonishing than that of the national debt. The debt which, at fifty millions, excited apprehension in Queen Anne’s reign, is now 768,789,240 l., and has been more. But the property which, at the same time, was reckoned at four hundred millions (i.e., eight times fifty millions), is now above six times that amount—the estimated value, at twenty-five years’ purchase, of the real property assessed to the property and income-tax being 2,382,112,425l. Yet, of this immense sum, the money left by David for the temple would not be greatly less than one half (say five-twelfths). It would exceed eight years’ purchase of all the costly tillage of this country; and equal eleven years of the annual value of the real property in Great Britain. It would be equal to 11 ½ years’ value of all the leading manufactures of the realm, and to twenty years’ value of all the exported produce and manufactures of the country. It would also absorb, for about the same period, all the public revenue of the United Kingdom. To state this is surely sufficient to show that there must be some error in the text, or in our apprehension of it. Some of our ingenious arithmetical readers may, if they please, carry out the calculations further, by reckoning how many wagons, how many ships would be required to carry all this metal—what would be its cubic contents?—what extent of surface would it pave with sovereigns, flat or set on edge?—for how many miles would it extend a golden line?—and whether it would not take a man a century of constant employment to count it out in sovereigns?
These estimates must be admitted to be simply impossible, after allowing to the utmost extent the opportunities which David possessed of acquiring wealth by his conquests of the neighboring nations. The plunder of the richest country in the world, though regarded even in the East as most amazing, did not furnish Nadir Shah with a twentieth part of this amount; and it may safely be affirmed, that the treasures of all the kings in the world, do not even at a far distance approach it. It therefore becomes necessary to seek some explanation. This is not difficult to find. The stated numbers are found in the Book of Chronicles, which was written after the Babylonish Captivity. Now it is reasonable to suppose that the people, most of whom were bred and born in Chaldea, used the weights and measures of that country—of which we have, indeed, a singular proof in the fact, that the Persian and Chaldean gold coin called the daric is mentioned in the computation of the donations of the nobles, although the coin was assuredly unknown in David’s time. Note: It is that which is rendered “dram” in 1Ch_29:7. Then the value of the Babylonian talent was greatly less than that of the Hebrews; that of the talent of gold being 3500 l., and of silver 218 l. 15 s., which would reduce the entire amount to about six hundred millions. This, though an immense reduction, seems still to be far too large, and some therefore think the Syriac talent to be intended, which was but one fifth of the Babylonian. This would bring it down to the comparatively reasonable, and not absolutely impossible, sum of 120,000,000 l. There is an independent corroboration of this in the fact that Josephus, whether by so reading in the original text as then extant, or by reducing the talents into talents of account, produces nearly the same result, by making the talents of gold not more than ten thousand, and of silver a hundred thousand. Even this sum seems far too large, in comparison with anything known to our experience; but we have no determinate data on which it may be further reduced, without supposing a corruption of the text of Chronicles. This is possible, from the facility with which numbers are corrupted in the course of time, from the circumstance that the numbers of Chronicles repeatedly differ from those of the same account in the Book of Kings, and are always in excess; which hence may be the case here also, where there is no parallel text in Kings to supply the means of comparison. It is certain that the details in Kings, so far as given, are favorable to a lower estimate. For instance, it is stated in 2Ch_3:8, that the gold consumed in overlaying the interior of the temple was 600 talents, which, by the usual computation of the Hebrew talent, would make 3,600,000 l. The remaining consumption of gold upon the utensils and furniture, could scarcely have more than doubled this; and if all the other materials—the brass, iron, stone, and timber, with the expense of skill and labor in the construction, not only of the central building, but of all the courts, walls, gates, corridors and towers, added another similar sum—the whole expense, on what seems to us a liberal calculation, would not much exceed ten millions. This is of itself an enormous sum, only to be explained by the extraordinary consumption of precious metal. This estimate, based on what is the most tangible item afforded in the Book of Kings, also happens to be in accordance with other particulars which are given to us of the wealth of Solomon, who was proverbially said to have made gold and silver as common as stones in Jerusalem. He appears to have had more opportunities of acquiring wealth than David; and yet, when the accounts transmitted to us are examined, the millions come before us in units, not in tens, in hundreds, or in thousands. The largest sums that came to him were from the distant three-year voyages to Ophir, from king Hiram, and from the queen of Sheba.
It is stated in 1Ki_10:14, that the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year (besides that by inland traffic) was 666 talents—equal to 3,996,000 l. This was probably the year which in the Ophir fleet returned from its three years’ voyage with 450 talents of gold, equal to 2,700,000 l.; another three years’ voyage produced 420 talents, equal to 2,520,000 l. These are comparatively moderate sums, especially when the expense of the ships, the mariners, and their victuals for three years, comes to be deducted. The queen of Sheba, coming from a gold-producing country, made Solomon a present of 120 talents of gold, equal to 720,000 l. The same quantity Solomon obtained from Hiram—doubtless for an equivalent consideration; and his want of so small a quantity of gold, as if to complete his works in that metal, strongly corroborates the impression that the amount left by David could not be so large as is usually supposed. Let it always be remembered that the gold was only wanted for ornamental work, and not as money. It does not therefore represent the cost of the works, but the actual metal worked up in them. Gold was a valuable property, but was not money—not the representation of value, as a medium of exchange. And this fact—its not being used as money—accounts for the great quantities thus expended. Had gold been a circulating medium, the use of such immense quantities in this manner would have been foolish, if not impossible. Silver was the standard of value; and hence it is that, although ten times as much silver as gold was accumulated for the undertaking, we read of very little being used up in the works of the temple. It has perplexed some to guess what became of it. The answer is easy: it was used to pay the workmen, and in the purchase of materials. It is very likely that Solomon may have bought gold with silver.
The fact is, that we who regard gold as a circulating medium, err greatly in transferring our own ideas of value to its ancient applications. Not being the medium of exchange, it was not diffused in small portions throughout a country, but, like jewels and other valuables, was accumulated in large masses in the hands of princes and individuals, who, not regarding it as available for money, though it was money’s worth, wrought it up in various forms for the ornament of their palaces and temples—considering justly, that they might as well do this as store it up in unwrought masses, in vaults and jars. Had it been possible, as now, to employ gold profitably, or to render the possession of it a source of income, in the shape of interest, no such vast collections of gold as we meet with in ancient times would have been heard of.