Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Kings 4

King over all Israel. —The emphasis laid upon “all” is characteristic of the writer, who compiled the book after the disruption of the kingdom.

And these were. —The officers described are of two classes—those attached to Solomon’s Court, and those invested with local authority.

The princes are evidently Solomon’s high counselors and officers, “eating at the king’s table.” The word is derived from a root which means to “set in order.” It is significant that whereas in the lists of David’s officers in 2 Samuel 8:16–18; 2 Samuel 20:23–26, the captain of the host stands first, and is followed in one list by the captain of the bodyguard, both are here preceded by the peaceful offices of the priests, scribes, and the recorder.

Azariah the son of Zadok the priest. —In 1 Chronicles 6:9–10, we find Azariah described as the son of Ahimaaz, and so grandson of Zadok; and the note in 1 Kings 4:10 (which is apparently out of its right place) seems to show that he was high priest at the time when the Temple was built. The title “priest” in this place must be given by anticipation, for it is expressly said below that Zadok and Abiathar were now the priests. The use of the original word, Cohen (probably signifying “one who ministers”), appears sometimes to retain traces of the old times, when the priesthood and headship of the family were united, and to be applied accordingly to princes, who perhaps still retained some of the ancient privilege.

Thus it is given to the sons of David in 2 Samuel 8:18, where the parallel passage in 1 Chronicles 18:17 has a paraphrase, chief about the king, evidently intended to explain the sense in which it is used in the older record. We may remember that David himself on occasions wore the priestly ephod (see 2 Samuel 6:14). Possibly in this sense it is applied in 1 Kings 4:5 to Zabud, the “king’s friend” (where the Authorized Version renders it by principal officer). But in this verse there is every reason for taking it in the usual sense. Azariah was already a “prince” before he succeeded to the high priesthood. The mingling of priestly and princely functions is characteristic of the time.

Sons of Shisha. —In 1 Chronicles 18:16, “Shavsha,” and in 2 Samuel 20:25, “Sheva,” is mentioned as the scribe of David. Probably these are variations of the same name, and the office may have become virtually hereditary. The “scribe,” or (see Margin) “secretary,” is constantly referred to as a high officer, issuing the king’s edicts and letters, and acting in his name, like our “Secretaries of State.”

Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud is named in 2 Samuel 8:16, 2 Samuel 20:24, and 1 Chronicles 18:15 as having been under David also the “recorder” or “remembrancer”—probably the annalist who drew up and preserved the archives of the kingdom.

Zadok and Abiathar ... the priests. —Abiathar, though disgraced and practically deposed, was still regarded theoretically as priest (much as Annas is called “high priest” in the Gospels), for the priesthood was properly for life.

Son of Nathan. —Probably Nathan, son of David, and own brother of Solomon (1 Chronicles 3:5), is here intended; for the title Cohen, here given to Zabud, is expressly ascribed in 2 Samuel 8:18 to the “sons of David;” and Nathan the prophet always has his title, “the prophet,” appended to his name wherever first mentioned in this book. (See 1 Kings 1:8; 1 Kings 1:10; 1 Kings 1:22; 1 Kings 1:32, and others.)

Azariah is the “chief of the officers”—that is, chief over the twelve officers mentioned below (1 Kings 4:7–19)—living, however, at Court.

Zabud, besides the title of Cohen, has that of “the king’s friend,” previously given to Hushai (2 Samuel 15:37; 2 Samuel 16:16), and apparently indicating special intimacy and wisdom as a “privy counsellor.”