Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Kings 10:22

"For the king had at sea a navy of Tarshish with the navy of Hiram: once every three years came the navy of Tarshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks." — 1 Kings 10:22 (ASV)

A navy of Tharshish. —There seems little doubt that the Tarshish of Scripture is properly Tartessus in Spain, which name, indeed, is drawn from an Aramaic form of Tarshish.

For:

1. Tarshish is first noted in Genesis 10:4 as among the descendants of Javan, the son of Japhet, which probably points to a European position;
2. in some other places (Isaiah 23:1; Isaiah 23:6; Isaiah 23:10; Isaiah 23:14; Ezekiel 27:12–13) as here, and in 23:48, it is closely connected with Tyre, of which Tartessus is expressly said by Arrian to have been a colony;
3. from Jonah 1:3 and Jonah 4:2, we gather that it was on the Mediterranean Sea;
4. the silver, which was evidently the chief import by this navy of Tarshish, was in ancient times found in large quantities in Spain, as also “the iron, lead, and tin,” mentioned with the silver in Ezekiel 27:12.

But the phrase “ships of Tarshish” appears to have become a technical phrase for ships of large size (Jeremiah 10:9; Psalms 48:8); therefore, a “navy of Tarshish” would not necessarily mean a navy going to Tarshish.

Now, the fleet of Solomon mentioned here is not identified in the text with the navy of Ophir, which started from Ezion-geber. Its imports (except gold, which is not distinctive) are not the same, and its separate mention seems rather to argue for its distinctness. “The sea,” moreover, unless otherwise determined by the context, would most likely mean the Great Sea, or Mediterranean Sea. In 2 Chronicles 9:21 (and also later, in 2 Chronicles 20:36), it is expressly said that the fleet went to Tarshish.

But the difficulty with this view is that the imports of the fleet—except for silver (which is indeed chiefly emphasized)—point to an Eastern, and probably an Indian, origin.

Not only do the “peacocks” expressly indicate India, which can be called their native country, but the names used for other imports also suggest foreign origins. For instance, koph, for “ape,” is not a Hebrew word but closely resembles the Sanskrit kapi. Similarly, tukki, for “peacock,” is a foreign word that closely resembles the Tamil tôka.

Regarding “ivory,” if the ordinary reading shen habbîm is maintained, this unusual word for ivory (which is generally simply shen, meaning “a tooth”) bears a resemblance in its second part to ibha, the Sanskrit name for “elephant.” However, it is generally thought that the correction shen habnîm, meaning “ivory [and] ebony,” should be accepted, especially as we find these two words used together in Ezekiel 28:15.

The only solution to this significant difficulty seems to be the supposition of a circumnavigation of Africa by fleets from Tyre to Ezion-geber, stopping in Africa and India. This view also accounts for the emphatic mention of the “three years” voyage, which would not have been necessary for going only to Tartessus and its vicinity.

Indeed, there is something startling in the idea of such a daring enterprise in this early age. However, a well-known passage in Herodotus (Book 4, Chapter 42) records exactly such a voyage in the days of Pharaoh-Necho, not apparently as a new thing—to say nothing of the celebrated record of the Periplus of Hanno. It seems clear that Tyrian seamanship and maritime enterprise were at their height in the days of Solomon.