1 Kings 4:1

This verse highlights King Solomon's administrative wisdom and efficiency in organizing his kingdom. By appointing officials to oversee different regions and provide provisions for his household, Solomon demonstrated his strategic leadership skills. The verse showcases the importance of delegation and structure in effective governance, allowing for the smooth running of the kingdom. Solomon's wise decisions in appointing capable individuals reflect his desire for order and prosperity in his reign. Overall, this verse sets the tone for Solomon's prosperous and well-managed rule over Israel.

Commentary

Keil-Delitzsch
John Gill
Matthew Henry

Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary

The Chief Ministers of State. - The list is introduced in Kg1 4:1 by the general remark, that "king Solomon was king over all Israel." Kg1 4:2 The first of the שׂרים, princes, i.e., chief ministers of state or dignitaries, mentioned here is not the commander-in-chief, as under the warlike reign of David (Sa2 8:16; Sa2 20:23), but, in accordance with the peaceful rule of Solomon, the administrator of the kingdom (or prime minister): "Azariah the son of Zadok was הכּהן," i.e., not the priest, but the administrator of the kingdom, the representative of the king before the people; like כּהן in v. 5, where this word is interpreted by המּלך רעה, with this difference, however, arising from the article before כּהן, that Azariah was the Kohen par excellence, that is to say, held the first place among the confidential counsellors of the king, so that his dignity was such as befitted the office of an administrator of the kingdom. Compare the explanation of כּהן at Sa2 8:18. The view of the Vulgate, Luther, and others, which has been revived by Thenius, namely, that כּהן is to be connected as a genitive with בּן־צדוק in opposition to the accents, "Azariah the son of Zadok the priest," is incorrect, and does not even yield any sense, since the connection of these words with the following Elichoreph, etc., is precluded by the absence of the copula Vav, which would be indispensable if Azariah had held the same office as the two brothers Elichoreph and Achijah. (Note: The objection by which Thenius tries to set aside this argument, which has been already advanced by Houbigant, viz., that "if the first (Azariah) was not also a state scribe, the copula would be inserted, as it is everywhere else from v. 4 onwards when a new office is mentioned," proves nothing at all, because the copula is also omitted in v. 3, where the new office of מזכּיר is introduced.) Moreover, Azariah the son of Zadok cannot be a grandson of Zadok the high priest, i.e., a son of Ahimaaz the son of Zadok, as many infer from 1 Chr. 5:34-35 (Ch1 6:8-9); for, apart from the fact that Zadok's grandson can hardly have been old enough at the time for Solomon to invest him with the chief dignity in the kingdom, which would surely be conferred upon none but men of mature years, we can see no reason why the Azariah mentioned here should not be called the son of Ahimaaz. If the Zadok referred to here was the high priest of that name, Azariah can only have been a brother of Ahimaaz. And there is no real difficulty in the way, since the name Azariah occurs three times in the line of high priests (1 Chr. 5:36, 39), and therefore was by no means rare. Kg1 4:3 Elichoreph and Achijah, sons of Shisha, who had held the same office under David, were secretaries of state (ספרים: see at Sa2 8:17 and Sa2 20:25, where the different names שׁשׁא = שׁיא and שׂריה are also discussed). - Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud was the chancellor, as he had already been in the time of David (Sa2 8:17 and Sa2 20:24). The rendering of Thenius, "whilst Jehoshaphat was chancellor," is grammatically impossible. Kg1 4:4 On Benaiah, compare Kg1 2:35 and the Commentary on Sa2 23:20. On Zadok and Abiathar, see at Sa2 8:17. It appears strange that Abiathar should be named as priest, i.e., as high priest, along with Zadok, since Solomon had deposed him from the priestly office (Kg1 2:27, Kg1 2:35), and we cannot imagine any subsequent pardon. The only possible explanation is that proposed by Theodoret, namely, that Solomon had only deprived him of the ἀρχή, i.e., of the priest's office, but not of the ἱερωσύνη or priestly dignity, because this was hereditary. (Note: Τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφείλατο, ου ̓ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐγύμνωσεν· τὴν γὰρ τῆς ἱερωσύνης αξίαν οὐκ ἐκ χειροτονίας ἀλλ ̓ ἐκ γονικῆς εἶχον διαδοχῆς. - Theodoret.) Kg1 4:5 Azariah the son of Nathan was over the נצּבים, i.e., the twelve officers named in vv. 7ff. Zabud the son of Nathan was כּהן (not the son of "Nathan the priest," as Luther and many others render it). כּהן is explained by the epithet appended, המּלך רעה: privy councillor, i.e., confidential adviser of the king. Nathan is not the prophet of that name, as Thenius supposes, but the son of David mentioned in Sa2 5:14. Azariah and Zabud were therefore nephews of Solomon. Kg1 4:6 Ahishar was הבּית על, over the palace, i.e., governor of the palace, or minister of the king's household (compare Kg1 16:9; Kg2 18:18, and Isa 22:15), an office met with for the first time under Solomon. Adoniram, probably the same person as Adoram in Sa2 20:24, was chief overseer of the tributary service. He was so in the time of David also.

Matthew Henry Bible Commentary

Here we have, I. Solomon upon his throne (Kg1 4:1): So king Solomon was king, that is, he was confirmed and established king over all Israel, and not, as his successors, only over two tribes. He was a king, that is, he did the work and duty of a king, with the wisdom God had given him. Those preserve the name and honour of their place that mind the business of it and make conscience of it. II. The great officers of his court, in the choice of whom, no doubt, his wisdom much appeared. It is observable, 1. That several of them are the same that were in his father's time. Zadok and Abiathar were then priests (Sa2 20:25), so they were now; only then Abiathar had the precedency, now Zadok. Jehoshaphat was then recorder, or keeper of the great seal, so he was now. Benaiah, in his father's time, was a principal man in military affairs, and so he was now. Shisha was his father's scribe, and his sons were his, Kg1 4:3. Solomon, though a wise man, would not affect to be wiser than his father in this matter. When sons come to inherit their father's wealth, honour, and power, it is a piece of respect to their memory, caeteris paribus - where it can properly be done, to employ those whom they employed, and trust those whom they trusted. Many pride themselves in being the reverse of their good parents. 2. The rest were priests' sons. His prime-minister of state was Azariah the son of Zadok the priest. Two others of the first rank were the sons of Nathan the prophet, Kg1 4:5. In preferring them he testified the grateful respect he had for their good father, whom he loved in the name of a prophet. III. The purveyors for his household, whose business it was to send in provisions from several parts of the country, for the king's tables and cellars (Kg1 4:7) and for his stables (Kg1 4:27, Kg1 4:28), that thus, 1. His house might always be well furnished at the best hand. Let great men learn hence good house-keeping, to be generous in spending according to their ability, but prudent in providing. It is the character of the virtuous woman that she bringeth her food from afar (Pro 31:14), not far-fetched and dear-bought, but the contrary, every thing bought where it is cheapest. 2. That thus he himself, and those who immediately attended him, might be eased of a great deal of care, and the more closely apply themselves to the business of the state, not troubled about much serving, provision for that being got ready to their hand. 3. That thus all the parts of the kingdom might be equally benefited by the taking off of the commodities that were the productions of their country and the circulating of the coin. Industry would hereby be encouraged, and consequently wealth increased, even in those tribes that lay most remote from the court. The providence of God extends itself to all places of his dominions (Psa 103:22); so should the prudence and care of princes. 4. The dividing of this trust into so many hands was prudent, that no man might be continually burdened with the care of it nor grow exorbitantly rich with the profit of it, but that Solomon might have those, in every district, who, having a dependence upon the court, would be serviceable to him and his interest as there was occasion. These commissioners of the victualling-office, not for the army or navy (Solomon was engaged in no war), but for the household, are here named, several of them only by their surnames, as great men commonly call their servants: Ben-hur, Ben-dekar, etc., though several of them have also their proper names prefixed. Two of them married Solomon's daughters, Ben-Abinadab (Kg1 4:11) and Ahimaaz (Kg1 4:15), and no disparagement to them to marry men of business. Better match with the officers of their father's court that were Israelites than with the sons of princes that were strangers to the covenant of promise. The son of Geber was in Ramoth-Gilead (Kg1 4:19), and Geber himself was in the country of Sihon and Og, which included that and Mahanaim, Kg1 4:14. He is therefore said to be the only officer in that land, because the other two, mentioned Kg1 4:13, Kg1 4:14, depended on him, and were subordinate to him.