Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible (1898)
O'PHIR, the celebrated gold-region to which the ships of Solomon and Hiram sailed from a port on the Red Sea, and from whence they returned bearing gold, silver, precious stones, and algum-tree wood; and they also brought ivory, apes, and peacocks, though it is not said that these latter came originally from Ophir. 1 Kgs 9:28; 1 Kgs 10:11, 1 Kgs 10:22. The ships of Jehoshaphat, built to make a similar voyage, were wrecked at Eziongeber. 1 Kgs
22:48. The abundance and fineness of the gold of Ophir were proverbial. Job 22:24; Acts 28:16; Ps 45:9; Isa 13:12; 1 Chr 29:4; Tobit 13:17; Ecclus. 7:18. The precise situation of Ophir is an unsettled question in scriptural geography. Three chief locations have been suggested: (1) Arabia; (2) India; (3) Eastern Africa. The arguments in favor of each location may be briefly stated as follows: Arabia. - The reason for placing Ophir in Arabia is
that this land of gold was probably named after Ophir, a son of Joktan, and a descendant of Shem, whose dwelling was between Mesha and Sephar, a mount of the east. Gen 10:29-30. Now, we find that Ptolemy, in his description of Arabia Felix, speaks of a town called Sapphara or Saphar, which resembles the Hebrew Sephar. This would place Ophir in Southern Arabia, upon the border of the Indian Ocean. Ritter objects to this location because Arabia
does not now produce gold. There is abundant evidence, however, to show that in ancient times gold was obtained in Arabia. Solomon received gold brought by the queen of Sheba, and Tyrian merchants traded in Arabian gold. 1 Kgs 10:15; 2 Chr 9:14; Eze 27:22. Diodorus and Pliny also testify that Arabia formerly abounded in gold, as well as in precious stones and sweet-smelling wood like the algum trees. India. - The argument of Ritter, Ewald, and
Max Muller in favor of locating Ophir in India is that some of the articles brought in the ships of Solomon are productions peculiar to India. Max Muller has also made an ingenious linguistic argument in favor of this theory, based upon the fact that the names of some of these articles are foreign words in Hebrew, and that they belong especially to the Sanscrit, the parent language of Eastern India. Neither of these considerations is of
sufficient weight to decide the question. Eastern Africa. - The idea that Ophir was identical with Sofala, on the Mozambique coast of Africa, appears to have been first suggested by Portuguese travellers in the sixteenth century. Some French scholars have approved of the theory, but it has not met with general favor. It is safe to conclude from the above statements that when the Hebrew writers spoke of going to Ophir they referred to the
Joktanite Ophir of the Arabian coast, though it is not improbable that the voyage of Solomon's ships extended to India.