(13) Cabul.--The derivation of this word is uncertain. Josephus evidently did not know it as a Hebrew word; for he expressly says, that in the Phaenician language it signifies "what is unpleasing." (Ant. viii. 100:5, sect. 3). A city Cabul is mentioned in Joshua 19:27, in the territory of Asher, evidently on the Tyrian frontier, and in the neighbourhood in question. Hiram, it is thought, takes up this name, and applies it to the whole territory, and by a play of words on it signifies his discontent with Solomon's gift. Ewald supposes a Hebrew derivation for the word ("as nought"); others take it to be "like that which vanishes." Either would suit the sense indicated in the text well; but unless these derivations represent something cognate in the Tyrian language, they hardly accord with the requirements of this passage, which (as Josephus says) implies a Phoenician origin for the word.

Verse 13. - And he said, What cities are these which thou hast given me, my brother? [Cf. 1 Kings 20:32. It would seem, at first sight, as if this form of speech was then, as now, the usage of courts. But the Fellahin of Palestine, the "modern Canaanites," still address each other as "my father" or "my brother." See Conder, "Tent-work," p. 332]. And he called them the land of Cabul [The meaning of this word is quite uncertain. The LXX. reads Οριον, which shows that they must have read גבול instead of כבול; indeed, it is possible that the words have the same meaning (Gesen.) Stanley (S. and P. p. 364) thinks these cities formed the boundary between the two kingdoms, and refers to the use of ὅρια in Matthew 15:21; Luke 6:17, etc. According to Josephus, Ξαβαλὼν, is a Phoenician word, meaning displeasing; but his etymologies are to be received with caution, and Gesenius justly pronounces this a mere conjecture from the context. Thenius and Ewald regard the word as compounded of כ and בל = as nothing; Keil connects it with the root חבל, which would yield the meaning pawned or pledged, and hence concludes that, this strip of territory was merely given to Hiram as a security for the repayment of a loan (see below on ver. 14); while Bahr derives it from כבל, an unused root, akin to the preceding - vinxit, constrinxit, and would see in it a name bestowed on the region because of its confined geographical position. He does not understand the word, however, as a term of contempt. "How," he asks, "could Hiram give the district a permanent name which contained a mockery of himself rather than of the land?" But the word was obviously an expression of disparagement, if not disgust, which, falling from Hiram's lips, was caught up and repeated with a view to mark not so much his displeasure as Solomon's meanness. But it is not necessary to find a meaning for the word, for it is to be considered that a city Bearing this name existed at that time and in this neighbourhood (Joshua 19:27), the site of which, in all probability, is marked by the modern Kabul, eight miles east of Accho (Robinson, 3:87, 88; Dict. Bib. 1:237; Thomson, "Land and Book," 1:281, 511). It is possible, indeed, that it may have been one of the "twenty cities" (ver. 11) given to Hiram. And if this city, whether within or without the district of Galilee, were notorious for its poverty or meanness, or conspicuous by its bleak situation, we can at once understand why Hiram should transfer the name to the adjoining region, even if that name, in itself, had no special significance] unto this day. [See on 1 Kings 8:8.]

9:10-14 Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities. Hiram did not like them. If Solomon would gratify him, let it be in his own element, by becoming his partner in trade, as he did. See how the providence of God suits this earth to the various tempers of men, and the dispositions of men to the earth, and all for the good of mankind in general.And he said,.... By letter to him:

what cities are these which thou hast given me, my brother? so he called him, being not only his neighbour, but his ally, in friendship and covenant with him; and this he said of them not by way of complaint, or contempt, as unworthy of his acceptance; for so munificent a prince as Solomon would never offer to a king to whom he was so much obliged anything mean and contemptible; but as being unsuitable to him, however valuable they might be in themselves, or of advantage to others:

and he called them the land of Cabul unto this day; or rather the words should be rendered impersonally, "they were called so"; for Hiram could not call them by this name to the times of the writer of this book; nor is there any reason to think he would give them any name at all, and much less a contemptible one, as this is thought to be, when he did not choose to accept of them. Some interpret (g) the word shut up, or unfruitful, sandy, dirty, clayey; so in the Talmud (h) it is said to be a sandy land, and called Cabul, because a man's foot was plunged in it up to his ankles, and is represented as unfruitful. Josephus (i) says, in the Phoenician tongue it signifies "not pleasing", which agrees with what Hiram says, 1 Kings 9:12. Hillerus (k) interprets it "as nothing", they being as nothing to Hiram, of no use to him, whatever they might be to others; and therefore he restored them to Solomon, 2 Chronicles 8:2, which seems to be the best sense of the word. They are the same with Decapolis, Matthew 4:25 so called from ten cities therein (l).

(g) David de Pomis, Lexic fol. 58. 2.((h) T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 54. 1.((i) Antiqu. l. 8. c. 5. sect. 3.((k) Onomastic. Sacr. p. 435. (l) Vid. Castel Lex Heptaglot. col. 1669. & Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 18.