1st Chronicles Chapter 29 verse 4 Holy Bible

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 4. - Respecting the uncertainty of the amounts here denoted, even if the numbers of the present text be accepted as correct, see note on 1 Chronicles 22:14. Bertheau and Keil make three thousand talents of gold the equivalent of thirteen millions and a half of our money, and seven thousand talents of silver the equivalent of two and a half millions of our money - or, if the royal shekel instead of the sacred be supposed to be the standard, they make them the half of those two amounts respectively. Others calculate the value of the gold to reach thirty millions, and of the silver three millions of our money (see Conder's 'Bible Handbook,' 2nd edit., pp. 63-65, 81). The situation of Ophir is still considered undetermined. The other occasions on which it is mentioned are as follows: - Genesis 10:29 (1 Chronicles 1:23); 1 Kings 9:28; 1 Kings 10:11; 1 Kings 22:49; 2 Chronicles 8:18; 2 Chronicles 9:10; Job 22:24; Job 28:16; Psalm 45:10; Isaiah 13:12. It must be understood also that it is to it that allusion is made in 1 Kings 10:22, where we read that silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks, beside the gold, were imported into Judaea from it. The "almug" tree is also said to have been brought in the same ships which brought the gold of Ophir. The Septuagint always translates by some form of the word Σουφίς (except in Genesis 10:29), which word comes very near the Coptic name for India. There is also a place in India, mentioned by Ptolemy, Ammianus, and Abulfeda, the site of the present emporium of Goa, called Σουπάρα, and which would explain Both the Hebrew and the Septuagint words. An Indian site for Ophir would also well suit the mention of the ivory and the particular wood which the ships brought. On the other hand, the first occasion of this name Ophir finds it placed among the tribes of Joktan's descendants, who occupied South Arabia. It is there (Genesis 10:29; 1 Chronicles 1:23) placed between Sheba and Havilah, beth abounding in gold. There are other considerations that favour Arabia. Many other places have been suggested, and some of them supported by respectable authorities, such as Eastern Africa, South America and Peru, Phrygia, etc. If there be a real question about it, to the prejudice of Arabia, it would be to India we must look. That some of the commodities brought belonged more especially to India, though even in that case the majority belonged undoubtedly to Arabia, is very true. This circumstance throws great probability into the suggestion that whether Ophir were in Arabia or India, it was a great emporium, and not simply an exporter of its own particular produce (see Gesenius, 'Lexicon,' sub voce; Smith's 'Bible Dictionary'). The last sentence of this verse certainly says that the destined use of the refined silver, as well as of the gold of Ophir, was to overlay the walls of the houses. We know that gold was used for this purpose (2 Chronicles 3:5-10). But we do not read of the silver being used for overlaying purposes. We also read that none of the drinking-vessels of Solomon were of silver, as "it was nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon" (1 Kings 10:21; 2 Chronicles 9:20). It is possible, the order of the-sentences notwithstanding, that the mention of the refined silver is only to pro-pare the way for the contents of ver. 5, and that it mast not be applied to the last sentence of our present verse.

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(4) Three thousand talents of gold.--Comp. 1Chronicles 22:14. The sum would be about 18,000,000 sterling.Gold of Ophir.--Indian gold, from Abhira, at the mouth of the Indus.Seven thousand talents of refined silver.--About 2,800,000 sterling.To overlay.--Strictly, to besmear (Isaiah 44:18).The houses.--The chambers (1Chronicles 28:11; see 2Chronicles 3:4-9). The Syriac and Arabic have "a thousand thousand talents of gold," and "twice a thousand thousand talents of silver." . . .