Charles Ellicott Commentary 2 Chronicles 8

And it came to pass. —The verb is identical with 1 Kings 9:10, slightly abbreviated.

Wherein. — When. The “twenty years” are reckoned from the fourth year of the reign (1 Kings 6:6), and include seven years during which the Temple was building, and thirteen during which the palace was built (1 Kings 6:38; 1 Kings 7:1).

Which Huram had restored. —Literally, which Huram gave.

Solomon built them. — Rebuilt or restored and fortified (Joshua 6:26; 1 Kings 15:17). The parallel passage (1 Kings 9:11–13) records a contrary transaction; that is to say, it represents Solomon as giving to Huram twenty cities in Galilee, as a return for his past services. It is added that these cities did not please Huram, and as a result they got the name of “The Land of Kâbûl” (i.e., “Like-nought”).

The Authorised Version here assumes that the explanation of Josephus (Antt. viii. 5, § 3) is correct. That writer states that Huram restored the despised cities to Solomon, who then repaired them, and populated them with Israelites. Others assume an exchange of friendly gifts between the two sovereigns, so that Solomon gave Huram twenty Israelite cities (Kings), and Huram gave Solomon twenty Phenician cities (Chronicles): this seems highly improbable. The former explanation appears to be substantially correct.

The chronicler, or the authority which he follows here, has omitted to notice a fact which seems to derogate from the greatness of Solomon, namely, the previous surrender of the territory in question to the Tyrian king; and has chosen to speak of Huram’s non-acceptance or return of Solomon’s present, as a gift. He then goes on to tell of the future fate of the twenty cities. Solomon repaired or fortified them, and colonised them with Israelites; for this border-land was chiefly inhabited by Gentiles (Isaiah 9:1, Galilee of the Gentiles).

A border-land is naturally more exposed to the ravages of an invader; and the cities which Solomon ceded to Huram may have been in a half-ruinous condition. This would account for Huram’s disappointment in them. The statement of our text, then, is neither an “effacement,” nor a “travesty” (Reuss), nor even a “remodelling” of that of the older text “in favour of Solomon” (Zöckler). It replaces the older text by another statement which is equally true, and not incompatible with it.

And Solomon went. — Marched (2 Samuel 12:29).

Hamath-zobah. —That is, Hamath bordering on Zobah (Compare to 1 Chronicles 18:3). Solomon’s conquest of the kingdom of Hamath, which had been on terms of amity with David, is not mentioned in 1 Kings 9; nor indeed anywhere else in the Old Testament. Thenius (on 2 Kings 14:25) supposes that the text describes not a conquest of Hamath itself, but only the annexation of part of its territory; namely, a part of the highly fruitful plain of Cœle-Syria, called by the Arabs Ard-el-Beqâa. This appears to be correct.

Against it. —Or, over it (a late construction, 2 Chronicles 27:5; Daniel 11:5).

And he built Tadmor in the wilderness. —That is, Palmyra, in the wilderness, on the traders’ route between the coast and Thapsacus on the Euphrates. See 1 Kings 9:18, where Tamar or Tammor of the Hebrew text is explained by the margin to mean Tadmor; and the epithet, “in the wilderness,” seems certainly to identify the two names. That Solomon was the founder of Palmyra is the tradition of the country to this day.

And all the store cities, which he built in Hamath. —1 Kings 9:19 mentions these cities, but not their locality. They were no doubt military strongholds, and served as outposts against the hostile neighboring kingdom of Zobah-Damascus. (See 1 Kings 11:23–25.) So far as they lay on the caravan route, they would also serve as provisioning stations. (Compare 2 Chronicles 32:28.)

Also. — And. 1 Kings 9:17, And Solomon built Gezer, and Beth-horon the nether.

Built — that is, fortified, as the rest of the verse explains. (See 1 Chronicles 7:24.) He built them as (or into) fenced cities, namely, walls, doors, and bar (Micah 7:12; Deuteronomy 3:5). This description is lacking in Kings.