TEXT [Commentary]
2. Solomon builds the Temple (6:1-13)
1 It was in midspring, in the month of Ziv,[*] during the fourth year of Solomon’s reign, that he began to construct the Temple of the LORD. This was 480 years after the people of Israel were rescued from their slavery in the land of Egypt.
2 The Temple that King Solomon built for the LORD was 90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high.[*] 3 The entry room at the front of the Temple was 30 feet[*] wide, running across the entire width of the Temple. It projected outward 15 feet[*] from the front of the Temple. 4 Solomon also made narrow recessed windows throughout the Temple.
5 He built a complex of rooms against the outer walls of the Temple, all the way around the sides and rear of the building. 6 The complex was three stories high, the bottom floor being 71/2 feet wide, the second floor 9 feet wide, and the top floor 101/2 feet wide.[*] The rooms were connected to the walls of the Temple by beams resting on ledges built out from the wall. So the beams were not inserted into the walls themselves.
7 The stones used in the construction of the Temple were finished at the quarry, so there was no sound of hammer, ax, or any other iron tool at the building site.
8 The entrance to the bottom floor[*] was on the south side of the Temple. There were winding stairs going up to the second floor, and another flight of stairs between the second and third floors. 9 After completing the Temple structure, Solomon put in a ceiling made of cedar beams and planks. 10 As already stated, he built a complex of rooms along the sides of the building, attached to the Temple walls by cedar timbers. Each story of the complex was 71/2 feet[*] high.
11 Then the LORD gave this message to Solomon: 12 “Concerning this Temple you are building, if you keep all my decrees and regulations and obey all my commands, I will fulfill through you the promise I made to your father, David. 13 I will live among the Israelites and will never abandon my people Israel.”
NOTES
6:1 It was in midspring, in the month of Ziv, during the fourth year of Solomon’s reign. The later (and current) Hebrew names for the months of the year are Babylonian in origin; only occasionally do we find the earlier (Canaanite or Phoenician) names as is the case here (see also the references to the months of “Bul” in 6:38 and “Ethanim” in 8:2). The Hebrew calendar, like most ancient calendars, was based on lunar months, always starting with the new moon, with the full moon always occurring on the 14th day of the month (cf. the beginning of Passover on the 14th day of the 1st month, Exod 12:6). The term “Ziv” probably means “bloom” or “blossom” (HALOT 265-266). Solomon’s “fourth year” is understood by some scholars as the first year of his sole reign after the death of his father David (see the first note on 1:35), although this was probably not understood as such by the editor of Kings (see next note). Cross (1972:17 n. 11) has calculated the actual date of the founding of Solomon’s Temple as 968 BC (see, conveniently, Barnes 1991:29-55 for details).
he began to construct the Temple of the LORD. Wiseman (1993:101-102), following Noth, has categorized the following architectural details of the Temple as arising probably from an archival report, or drawn from memory of an observer, or derived from oral instruction given to craftsmen. In any case, they are described “in insufficient detail for any sure reconstruction to be made.” For the differences between the MT and the LXX, some of which are quite significant both in content and in editorial arrangement, see the excellent discussion found in Gooding 1967a:143-172.
This was 480 years after the people of Israel were rescued from their slavery in the land of Egypt. This reference, as well as the reference to “300 years” found in Judg 11:26, provide significant support for the so-called “early date” of c. 1450 BC for the exodus from Egypt. But most scholars see this 480-year synchronism as a round number based on a calculation of twelve generations of 40 years each (LXX reads “440 years,” presumably reckoning eleven generations of 40 years; cf. Cogan 2001:236; Wiseman 1993:104). Kitchen (1966:72-75) is particularly helpful concerning the secondary nature of synchronistic calculations such as this; he posits about 300 years from the Exodus to Solomon (corresponding with the so-called “late date” for the Exodus of c. 1280 BC). In any case, many scholars including myself (see the “Excursus on Chronology” in the Introduction for details) consider this 480-year period as editorially very significant for the writer/editor of Kings. Furthermore, I would point to a second 480-year period of time as reckoned by the exilic compiler of Kings, derived from the Judahite regnal totals from the accession of David to the throne to the release of Jehoiachin from prison in his 37th year of exile—but this would necessitate positing no overlapping of any reign, hence no coregencies—at least as calculated by the final compiler(s) of Kings.
6:2 90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high. This is essentially double the size of the Mosaic Tabernacle (Wiseman 1993:102). The NLT mg gives the original dimensions in Hebrew cubits. A “cubit” is traditionally the distance between the elbow and the tip of the middle finger; it is the most basic measure of length in the ancient world (Sweeney 2007:110). The NLT mg note represents the standard equivalence of 18 inches (46 cm) to a cubit (cf. Powell in ABD 6.899-900), though a “long” or “royal” cubit may have been employed occasionally. Powell himself (ABD 6.900) remains largely skeptical of the alleged evidence for this; the correspondence of 50 cm (plus or minus 5 percent [or more!]) for a cubit seems, in his opinion, to fit the archaeological evidence the best.
6:4 narrow recessed windows. This is a traditional and quite possible translation, although far from certain. Wiseman (1993:105) notes that windows such as these are not yet attested archaeologically for this time, and he prefers understanding the references here to indicate features found in a typical Syrian-Assyrian portico built in front of a main building, with side rooms, columns, lintels and doorposts.
6:5 a complex of rooms. Again, the details are somewhat obscure. Possibly a structure similar to Wiseman’s suggested interpretation of the previous verse is in view here (see note on 6:4). Kitchen, in a helpful article (1989:110) replete with comparisons with temple complexes throughout the ancient Near East, notes that the storage area of Solomon’s Temple was probably twice that of the worship area in the Temple proper—and that this ratio was not at all anomalous as some have argued. Ancient cults required significant storage space for a great variety of ritual paraphernalia, much of it made of precious metals; votive gifts required secure spaces for safekeeping; and Temple revenues such as grain, wine, oil, etc., also required enormous storage capacity.
6:6 connected . . . by beams. The upper floors of these storage areas are usually understood as resting on offset ledges built in the Temple walls as they diminish in thickness at higher levels (generally a three-tiered structure is envisioned). Alternatively, as in the NLT, the beams rested on “ledges built out from the wall.” In any case, any such “beams” (no such term appears in the Hebrew here) were not inserted into the wall proper (cf. the next verse, where there was no sound from any masonry tools permitted at the site).
6:7 there was no sound. Although the stone used for the Temple was “finished” or “dressed” (i.e., “rough-hewn” from the quarry [so Cogan 2001:239-240]), no further work was done on site. Cogan thus sees here a clear reflection of the ancient requirement that Israelite altars were to be built of natural, unworked stone (Exod 20:25). Sweeney (2007:112) adds that this prohibition may have served to preserve “the pristine quality of the Temple as the center of YHWH’s creation.” Despite significant differences between the Tabernacle and the Temple, a number of which have been and will continue to be cited below, the strong continuities between the two cult sanctuaries should also be emphasized.
6:8 entrance to the bottom floor. Most commentators support the suggested emendation from “middle” to “bottom” as found in the NLT text (cf. mg note). The change in the Hebrew is slight, and the versional support is strong; but see Sweeney (2007:112) for a stirring defense of the MT here.
winding stairs. The Hebrew term lullim [TH3883, ZH4294] is a hapax legomenon (Greek for “said only once”), meaning it is only found here in the Hebrew Bible. The ancient versions understood the term as a “winding stairway,” and Cogan (2001:240) links it possibly to the term lule’oth [TH3924, ZH4339], “loops” on the edges of the Tabernacle curtains (Exod 26:4), or else possibly akin to a “passageway” or “trapdoor” leading to the Holy of Holies in the Herodian Temple. Kitchen (1989:108), citing parallels from Egypt, plausibly suggests a staircase progressing upward with 90º turns, hence a “spiral stair.”
6:10 As already stated. This phrase is not found in the original, but it does helpfully sum up the otherwise bewildering discussion. Such resumptive references are typical of Semitic exposition, with its preference for inclusios and refrains. (For the meaning of inclusio, see the first note on 3:15.)
6:12 Concerning this Temple. This demurral anticipates the extended discussion found in 9:1-9. The writer wisely reminds the reader that despite the extended discussion concerning the architectural minutiae of this grand Temple and its accoutrements, no building, no matter how grand, can stand in place of fundamental loyalty to the Davidic covenant (a favorite theme of 1–2 Kings; cf. “The ‘Lamp’ of David” section in the Introduction).
COMMENTARY [Text]
For the exilic reader of this passage (like the present readers), this Temple is no more. Whether it was indeed a spiral staircase (see note on 6:8) that stood in the “complex of rooms” (6:5; see note) adjoining the Temple, whether it was the first floor or the second floor where the entrance was on the south side of that complex (note on 6:8), and whether there indeed were narrow recessed windows (6:4) in the Temple proper cannot be determined. Solomon’s Temple was eventually destroyed. This impermanence is suggested in 6:11-12. Only God is permanent. The reader is encouraged to maintain a good relationship with him above a connection to any temple.
The Temple was a small structure, and only a small part of Solomon’s overall building program. It was probably meant to serve as a royal chapel, with other places of worship of Yahweh (and, sadly, of other gods also) available to the people elsewhere.[35] But it eventually became a national cathedral. The eminent historian John Bright (1981:218) wrote the following about Solomon’s Temple: “The Temple served a dual purpose. It was a dynastic shrine, or royal chapel, its chief priest an appointee of the king and a member of his cabinet; it was also, as the presence of the Ark indicates, intended as the national shrine of the Israelite people.” Under King Josiah (and possibly earlier), it became the only place where Yahweh might properly be worshiped (see “One Place of Worship” in the Introduction). But eventually even this one place of worship would be no more. And again, the Kings text here already anticipates that very point, at least to some degree.
I have emphasized at some length the role of the Temple as a royal chapel, perhaps neglecting the other stated purpose of the Temple as the repository for the Ark. (The notes and commentary on 8:1-11 will have much to say about this.) Let us recall how the people had rejoiced greatly when the Ark was first brought into the City of David (2 Sam 6), with King David blessing the people in the name of Yahweh (2 Sam 6:18) and giving them choice gifts of food in celebration (2 Sam 6:19). It is evident that all the people shared in the same joy as their dynastic ruler. This is also true in the present passage. The people shared in the nationalistic delight of seeing the Temple being built. Architectural details mattered less to them than to the priests and palace officials, but the overall effect remained grand, if not grandiose. As in Jeremiah’s day (see, especially, the so-called “Temple sermon” of Jer 7), the presence of such a grand Temple already bespoke a grand deity, and, yes, a grand Davidic dynasty. Such an effect is understandable, and, if properly understood, more than acceptable. But such an effect can become nothing less than idolatrous—as noted in Jeremiah 7:4, 8 (the NLT has a particularly effective translation for both these verses). Grand storerooms surrounding a grander Temple structure were something to be proud of. But pride can certainly lead to destruction (Prov 16:18), and that is true for the people as well as for their king. Yes, the king—the one who must remain particularly close to Yahweh if there is to be any hope of permanent safety and blessing for his people (see 6:13), Temple or no Temple. For no temple can protect a people whose political/spiritual leader is bankrupt. Thus, even the present passage, with all its fascinating and obscure architectural detail, explicitly reminds its audience of their covenantal responsibilities (6:11-13) (Seow 1999:62-63).