1 Kings 10:5

And the meat of his table, and the sitting of his servants, and the attendance of his ministers, and their apparel, and his cupbearers, and his ascent by which he went up unto the house of the LORD; there was no more spirit in her.

And the meat of his table - including the immense amount, variety, and luxuriousness of the daily provisions (cf. 1 Kings 4:22), as well as the sumptuous splendour of the equipage at the royal table (1 Kings 10:21).

And the sitting of his servants, х uwmowshab (H4186) `ªbaadaayw (H5650)] - and the seat of his servants; i:e., the particular place assigned to each according to gradation; or the collective body of his servants (cf Psalms 1:1, where the original word is used to denote a session or assembly), with the tout ensemble of the household economy, and particularly the orderly manner of the domestic arrangement in the servant's halls and at the various tables in the court. An oriental sovereign always possesses a vast number of servants; but whether we consider his large and luxurious table, the extent of his harem, the magnificent edifices he reared, and the spacious pleasure-grounds he maintained, the numerous stud in the king's mews (see Josephus 'Antiquities,' b. 8:, ch. 6:, sec. 3), besides the long retinue of liveried lackeys that composed his official entourage, Solomon must have had an enormous number of domestics, natives and foreigners (see on their different names and conditions among the Hebrews, Genesis 14:14; Genesis 15:3; Genesis 17:12; Genesis 17:23; Numbers 31:11; Numbers 31:26; Numbers 31:35; Deuteronomy 20:14; Deuteronomy 21:10).

And the attendance of his ministers, х uwma`ªmad (H4612) mªshaarªtaayw (H8334)] - and the standing, the station, of his ministers, denoting probably not only the graduated position occupied by each at the public levees, but, in a wider sense, the posts held in the court and government.

And their apparel. While that of Solomon himself was gorgeous, his royal robes being, usually of,very rich stuffs, white (Josephus, 'Antiquities,' b. 8:, ch. 7:, sec. 3), the dress of his attendants also was distinguished for its elaborateness and splendour. In particular, in his daily progresses to his gardens and pleasure-grounds, he was accompanied by a numerous retinue of riders, young men in the flower of their age, eminent for their tall and handsome figure, their long luxuriant hair hanging over their shoulders, profusely sprinkled with gold dust, while their persons were attired in costly garments of Tyrian purple, with the additional accoutrements of armour and bow.

And his cup-bearers, х uwmashqaayw (H4945)]. Our translators, following the Septuagint [which has tous oinochoous autou], have considered that butlers are meant. The cup-bearer certainly was an office of great importance and influence in the palace of ancient Oriental sovereigns (Neb. 1:11), and might be entitled to the distinction of a separate notice. [Keil, however, reads, miqshaah; denoting turned work. In this sense it occurs in 1 Kings 6:23; 1 Kings 6:28; Exodus 25:18; while it is used, Genesis 40:21, to denote the care of drinking vessels; so that he understands it, with the Chaldee version, as referring to the furnishing and contents of the wine cellar.]

And his ascent by which he went up unto the house of the Lord х wª`olaatow (H5930) 'ªsher (H834) ya`ªleh (H5927) beeyt (H1004) Yahweh (H3068). The Septuagint renders this clause, kai teen holokautoosin autou heen aneferen en oikoo kuriou, and the holocaust (burnt offering) which he offered in the house of the Lord]. The Chaldee, Syriac and Arabic versions give a similar translation, and so also does Martin Luther in his German Bible. Under the burnt offering, as the principal, the other sacrifices are understood to be comprehended; and, in his construction of the temple, and the order of the sacred service which doubtless would be objects of interest to the Queen of Sheba, she would be accompanied by Solomon, who would furnish all necessary information as to the nature, reason, or symbolical import of the various offerings.

This translation, however, though strenuously maintained by eminent writers as giving the true meaning of the passage, is not generally acquiesced in; and the view most favoured by modern scholars is, that it contains a reference to the famous viaduct which Solomon made from his palace in the city of David to the temple (2 Chronicles 9:4). Mr. Williams ('Holy City') is of opinion that this approach was formed by an earthen mound, and identifies it with the street extending from the bazaars to the western gate of the Haram-the usual way of descent to the Place of Wailing. But if this "ascent" was only an elevated bank of earth, which was formed with labour and expense, to fill up the ravine between the two hills she must have been very inexperienced indeed when she was overwhelmed with astonishment at the sight of a construction so common. It was not, however a mound or causeway, but a viaduct, spanned by arches, and described elsewhere as a "covert for the sabbath, and the king's entry without" (2 Kings 16:18) - i:e., his private entrance into the temple, which formed an object of such unbounded admiration to the Queen of Sheba (cf. 1 Chronicles 26:16).

To Dr. Robinson, the celebrated American traveler, the Christian world is indebted, not only for the discovery of it, but for directing attention to the purpose of the erection. Having observed some of the huge stones jutting out from the western walls, he imagined at first that this mural dislocation had been produced by the shock of an earthquake, or some violent commotion. But on further examination, he found that the stones appeared to have belonged to an arch, and at length was forced to conclude that this arch must have formed part of the BRIDGE, which, according to Josephus, led from this part of the temple to the Xystus on Zion. 'The traces of this arch are too distinct and definite to be mistaken. Its southern side Isaiah 39 English feet distant from the southwest corner of the area, and the arch itself measures 51 feet along the wall. Three courses of its stones still remain, of which one Isaiah 5 feet 4 inches thick and the other not much less. One of the stones Isaiah 20:1 /2 feet long, another 24 1/2 feet, and the rest in like proportion. The part of the curve or arc which remains is of course but a fragment; but of this fragment the chord measures 12 feet 6 inches the sine 11 feet 10 inches, and the cosine 3 feet 10 inches. The distance from this point across the valley of the Tyropoeon to the precipitous natural neck of Zion we measured and found it to be 350 feet, or about 116 yards. This gives the proximate length of the ancient bridge (Josephus, "Antiquities," b. 14:, ch. 4:, sec. 2; "Jewish Wars," b. 1:, proximate length of the ancient bridge (Josephus, "Antiquities," b. 14:, ch. 4:, sec. 2; "Jewish Wars," b. 1:, ch. 7, sec. 2; 2:, 16, 3; 6:, 6, 3; 6:, 8, 1).

Captain Wilson, who is employed by the Palestine Exploration Society, has discovered one of the arches of this bridge in a good state of preservation. The span of this arch is between forty and fifty feet, composed of large stones, like those seen at the Jewish Wailing Place. As to the immense stones used in the arch, the fire with which the Chaldeans destroyed the first temple would not affect these foundations; nor is it probable that a feeble colony of returning exiles could have accomplished works like these. There is therefore little room for hesitation referring them back to the days of Solomon' ('Biblical Researches,' 1:, pp. 425-428; Drew's 'Scripture Lands,' p. 161, note 30; 'Handbook of Syria and Palestine,' p. 120; 'Tent and Khan,' p. 275).

There was no more spirit in her - (cf. Daniel 10:17.)