SOBRIETY

which cleanses.' The cognate word bSr is commonly rendered 'cleanness,' but in Job 9", Is 1^ RVm gives 'lye.' Soap in the modern sense of the word was un-known in OT times, and we do not know what precisely is referred to by bdrUh. As in Jer 2^2 nether (AV 'nitre' [wh. see]), a mineral alkali, is set in antithesis to bSrlth, it is supposed that the latter was some kind of vegetable alkali which, mixed with oil, would serve the purposes of soap. This may be confirmed by the fact that in Jer 2P and Mai 3^ LXX renders bBritli by poia = ' grass.'

J. C. Lambert.

SOBRIETY. — See Temperance, 1.

SOCO, SOCOH (RV has Socoh everywhere, except in 1 Ch 418 and 2 Ch 28i», where it has Soco).—l. A fortified town in the Shephelah of Judah, mentioned in Jos 15'* along with Adullam and Azekah; the Philistines (1 S 17') ■pitched between Socoh and Azekah'; Ben-hesed, one of Solomon's twelve ofilcers, had charge of it (1 K 4'°); it was re-f ortifled by Rehoboam (2 Ch 11'); duringthe reign of Ahaz it was taken, along with other prominent fortress cities of the Shephelah, by the Philistines. Its site was known to Eusebius and Jerome. It is now Khurbet ShuwHkeh (dim. of Arab. Shaukeh), a ruin on a remark-able isolated hill in the Wady es-Sunt (Vale of Elah) near where it turns west. The hill is surrounded on three sides by deep valleys, while on the remaining, the B. end, a narrow, low neck, easily defended, connects it with the higher ground. Although there are few re-mains on the surface, the ancient city wall may be traced round most of the circumference: there is a plentiful spring to the S.'W. Such a defensible site, lying close to main roads from Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Hebron, etc., to the great Philistine plain, must always have been of first-class importance. The Suchathites of 1 Ch 2*' are perhaps inhabitants of Socoh.

2. Another Socoh (apparently) is mentioned in Jos 15*', along with Jattir and Debir. The site of this may be esh-Shuweikeh, 10 miles S.W. of Hebron. 3. Soco in 1 Ch 4'! is probably one or other of these two towns. E. W. G. Masterman.

SOD, SODDEN.— See Seethe.

SODI. — The father of the Zebulunite spy (Nu 13").

SODOM. — See Dead Sea, Plain [Cities of the].

SODOmiTISH SEA, 2 Es 5' =the Dead Sea (wh. see).

SOJOURNER.— See Stranger.

SOLDIER. — See Army, Legion, War.

SOLEMN, SOLEMNITY.— The adj. 'solemn' fre-quently occurs in AV, always with assembly or meeting or some such word, and always in its early sense of 'regular' or 'public' Thus 'a solemn feast' means simply 'a stated feast'; there is no corresponding word in the Hebrew. In the same way 'solemnity' means 'public occasion.' How much this word, as used in AV, differs from its modern meaning, may be seen from Shaks., Midsummer Night's Dream, v. i. 376; *A fortnight hold we this solemnity. In nightly revels and new jollity.'

SOLEMN ASSEMBLY.— See Conqbegation

SOLOMON.— 1. Sources.— 1 K 1-11 (cf. 11*'), with parallels in 2 Ch 1-9 (add references in closing chs. of 1 Ch.). In Chronicles the character of Solomon, as of the period as a whole, is idealized; e.g. nothing is said of the intrigues attending his accession, his foreign marriages and idolatry, or his final troubles, even with Jeroboam. Details are added or altered in accordance with post-exilic priestly conceptions (5'^. 's 7' 8"-"); 1' (cf. 1 K 3') makes the sacrifice at Gibeon more orthodox; the dream becomes a theophany; in 7'- ' fire comes down from heaven. In 9™ reference is made to authorities, possibly sections of 1 K.; there is no evidence that the Chronicler was able to go behind 1, 2 K. for his materials. The books of OT and Apocrypha ascribed to Solomon are of value only as giving later

SOLOMON

conceptions of his career. Josephus (Ant. viii. i.-viii.) cannot be relied on where he differs from OT; the same holds good of the fragments quoted by Eusebius and Clemens Alexandrinus. Later legends, Jewish and Mohammedan, are interesting, but historically value-less; the fact that they have in no way influenced the OT narrative is an evidence of its general reliability; only two dreams and no marvels are recorded of Solomon. Archeology has so far contributed very little to our knowledge of his reign.

2. Chronology .^His accession is dated c. b.c. 969, i.e. about 50 years later than the traditional chronology. We have unfortunately no exact data, the dates of Hiram and Shishak (1 K 11*°) not having been precisely determined. The origin and interpretation of the 480 years in 6' are very doubtful. The 'little child' of 3' (cf. Jer 1') does not require the tradition that Solomon was only twelve at his accession (Josephus); the prob-abilities point to his being about twenty. The 40 years of his reign, as of David's (cf. Jg 3"- '» 5" S's etc.), would seem to represent a generation.

3. Early years. — Solomon was the son of David and Bathsheba (2 S 122*- ^), presumably their eldest sur-viving child; his position in the lists of 5", 1 Ch 3' 14* is strange, perhaps due to emphasis. The name means 'peaceful' (Heb. Shelomoh; cf. Irenoeus, Friedrich), indicating the longing of the old king (1 Ch 22=); cf. Absalom ('father is peace'). The name given him by Nathan (2 812^), Jedidiah (' beloved of J",' the same root as David), is not agam referred to, perhaps as being too sacred. It was the pledge of his father's restoration to Divine favour. "We have no account of his training. 'The Lord loved him' (2 S 12") implies great gifts; and V.2S and 1 K 1 suggest the influence of Nathan. His mother evidently had a strong hold over him (1 K 1. 2).

4. Accession. — The appointment of a successor in Eastern monarchies depended on the king's choice, which in Israel needed to be ratified by the people (1 K 12); where polygamy prevails, primogeniture cannot be assumed. 1" implies a previous promise to Bathsheba, perhaps a 'court secret'; the public proclamation of 1 Ch 222-18, if at all historical, must be misplaced. Adonijah, 'a very goodly man' (1 K 1«), relying on the favour of the people (2«) [it is doubtful whether he was the eldest surviving son], made a bid for the throne, imitating the method of Absalom and taking advantage of David's senility. He was easily foiled by the prompt action of Nathan and Bathsheba; Solomon himself was evidently young, though soon able to assert himself. The careful and impressive ritual of the coronation was calculated to leave no doubt in the people's mind as to who was the rightful heir. The young king learned quickly to distinguish between his friends and enemies, as well as to rely on the loyalty of the Cherethites, his father's foreign bodyguard. The sparing of Adonijah (1 K 1») suggests that he was not a very formidable competitor; his plot was evidently badly planned. His request to Bathsheba (21=) may have been part of a renewed attempt on the kingdom (as heir he claims his father's wives), or may have been due to real affection. At any rate the king's suspicion or jealousy was aroused, and his rival was removed; Canticles suggests that Solomon himself was believed to have been the lover of Abishag. The deposition of Abiathar, and the execution of Joab and Shimei, were natural consequences; and in the case of the two last, Solomon was only following the advice of his father (25- s). He thus early emphasized his power to act, and as a result ' his kingdom was established greatly' at a cheap cost. We shall hardly criticise the removal of dangerous rivals when we remember the fate which he himself would have met if Adonijah had suc-ceeded (121), and the incidents common at the beginning of a new reign (2 K lli; cf. Pr 25*).

5. Policy. — The work of Solomon was to develop the ideas of his father. He consolidated the kingdom.