Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Kings 21

Which was in Jezreel.—The Septuagint omits these words and makes the vineyard to be hard by the threshing-floor of Ahab, king of Samaria—the word being the same as that rendered void place in 1 Kings 22:10—apparently near the palace of Ahab in Samaria, not in Jezreel. The Vulgate renders who was instead of which was in Jezreel.

The question of the position of the vineyard, apparently the scene of Naboth’s murder, is difficult. The “plot of ground” of Naboth, referred to in 2 Kings 9:25–26—not, however, called “a vineyard”—is clearly at Jezreel, where, as a native of the place, Naboth would be likely to hold land. However, the vineyard may have been an outlying property near Samaria, which Ahab might naturally suppose Naboth, even for that reason, likely to sell.

In favor of this supposition—which is, perhaps, on the whole the more probable—is the very emphatic prediction of 1 Kings 21:19, which in 1 Kings 22:38 is declared to have been fulfilled at the pool of Samaria. Moreover, the whole action of the chapter, as far as Ahab is concerned, seems to have been at Samaria; and, indeed, if we take 1 Kings 21:18 literally, this is actually declared to be the case.

On the other hand, however, we have the reading of the text, the more obvious interpretation of the words his city in 1 Kings 21:8; 1 Kings 21:11; and the reference to the prophecy of Elijah, in connection with the casting of the body of Jehoram into the plot of ground at Jezreel (2 Kings 9:25–26). It is, perhaps, impossible to clear up the discrepancy entirely with our current knowledge.

(2–4) And Ahab spake.—The whole history is singularly true to nature. At first, as Ahab’s desire was natural, so his offer was courteous and liberal. Naboth’s refusal—evidently grounded on the illegality, as well as the natural dislike, of alienating the inheritance of his fathers (Numbers 36:7), and therefore not only allowable but right—nevertheless has about it a certain tone of harshness, perhaps of unnecessary discourtesy, implying condemnation, as well as rejection, of the king’s offer.

It is characteristic of Ahab’s weak and petulant nature that he neither recognizes the legality and justice of Naboth’s action, nor dares to resent the curt defiance of his refusal. Like a spoiled child, he comes back sullen and angry, throws himself on his bed, and will eat no bread. All that he has is as nothing to him while the little plot of ground is refused; just as for Haman, all was worthless while Mordecai the Jew sat in the king’s gate (Esther 5:13). This temper of sullen, childish discontent is the natural seedplot of crime, under the instigation of more determined wickedness.

Dost thou now. —Jezebel's scorn is, like Lady Macbeth's impatience, expressed in a striking boldness of emphasis. First comes the bitter irony of the question, Dost thou govern the kingdom of Israel, and yet suffer a subject to cross thy will? expressing her scornful wonder at one who “lets I dare not, wait upon I would.”

Then in the invitation, eat bread, and let thine heart be merry, there seems the same half-contemptuous recognition of a self-indulgent weakness of nature. This weakness may be traced in Elijah’s words in 1 Kings 18:41, Get thee up, eat and drink, for there is a sound of abundance of rain. Ahab is fit only to desire and to revel; it is for bolder spirits to act for good or for evil.

Sealed them with his seal — with the name, or token, of the king, engraved on stone, and impressed on a lump of clay attached to the letter. The sealing (as the modern sense of “signature” implies) was the pledge of authenticity and authority. (Nehemiah 9:38; Nehemiah 10:1; Esther 3:10; Esther 3:12; Daniel 6:17; and so on.) The use of the seal—ordinarily worn or carried on the person—implies Ahab’s knowledge that something is being done in his name, into which he takes care not to inquire.

In his city. — This would be most naturally interpreted as Jezreel; but if Naboth dwelt or sojourned at Samaria, it may be Samaria. Jezebel naturally desires that neither Ahab nor she herself, though close at hand, should appear in the matter; but gives the necessary authority in writing, because without it the deed could not be done.

Proclaim a fast. —This might have been intended only to cover all that was to be so foully done with a cloak of religious observance. Or, perhaps more probably, it was meant to imply that some secret sin had been committed, which would bring down vengeance on the whole city, and so to prepare for the false accusation. There is a similar ambiguity regarding the explanation of the command, set Naboth on high, as either an exaltation of pretended honour, or the lifting up his head (Genesis 40:20) for accusation. It may be noted that the whole scheme implies a return of the people to at least the outward observance of the Law of the Lord.

Two men—in accordance with Numbers 35:30; Deuteronomy 17:6.

Sons of Belial.—See Judges 19:22; Judges 20:13; 1 Samuel 1:16; 1 Samuel 2:12; 1 Samuel 10:27; 1 Samuel 25:17; 1 Samuel 25:25; 1 Samuel 30:22; 2 Samuel 16:7; 2 Samuel 20:1, and others, properly, "children of lawlessness, or worthlessness."

Blaspheme.—The word is the same used in Job 1:5; Job 1:11; Job 2:5, there rendered "curse." It properly signifies "to bless;" then, "to part from with blessing;" finally to part from, or "disown." It is, rather, therefore, "to renounce" than "to blaspheme." The punishment, however, was stoning, as for positive blasphemy. (Deuteronomy 13:9–10.)