Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary

Solomon had a great throne of ivory made, and had it overlaid with fine gold. כּסּא־שׁן is not a throne made of ivory, but one merely ornamented with ivory; and we are to imagine the gilding as effected by laying the gold simply upon the wood, and inserting the ivory within the gold plate. מוּפז, a hophal participle of פּזז: aurum depuratum, hence = טהור in Ch2 9:17. The throne had six steps, and a "rounded head on the hinder part thereof," i.e., a back which was arched above or rounded off, (Note: Instead of מאחריו לכּסּה עגול וראשׁ we have in the Chronicles מאחזים לכּסּא בּזּהב וכבשׁ, "and a footstool in gold fastened to the throne" (the plural מאחזים refers to the footstool and the steps). Now, however easily מאחזים may have been written by mistake for מאחריו, זהב כבשׁ cannot have grown out of עגול ראשׁ by any such mistake. The quid-pro-quo of the lxx for עגול rof xxl ראשׁ, προτομαὶ μόσχων, in which עגול is certainly confounded with עגל, does not warrant the conjecture of Thenius, that the Chronicler found עגל in his original and substituted כּבשׂ (lamb), whereupon כּבשׂ (lamb) was changed by another hand into כּבשׁ footstep, and ראשׁ was dropped altogether.) and ירת, arms, i.e., arms on both sides of the seat (השּׁבת מקום), and two lions standing by the side of the arms. Beside this there were twelve lions upon the six steps, namely two upon each step, one on this side and one on that. Instead of אריים (Kg1 10:20) we find ארירת in Kg1 10:19, just as we do in both verses of the Chronicles, not because the reference is to artificial, inanimate figures and not to natural lions, as Thenius supposes, but because the plural ending ים- is an unusual one with this word; and even where natural lions are spoken of, we always find ארירת in other passages (cf. Jdg 14:5; Sa2 1:23; Kg2 17:25; Sol 4:8, etc.). The lions were symbols of the ruler's authority; and the twelve lions upon the steps may possibly have pointed to the rule over the twelve tribes of Israel, which was concentrated in the throne; not "watchers of the throne," as Thenius thinks. This throne was so splendid a work, that the historian observes that nothing of the kind had ever been made for any other kingdom. Upon the early Assyrian monuments we do indeed find high seats depicted, which are very artistically worked, and provided with backs and arms, and some with the arms supported by figures of animals (see Layard's Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 301), but none resembling Solomon's throne. It is not till a later age that the more splendid thrones appear (vid., Rosenmller, A. u. N. Morgenland, iii. pp. 176ff.).