case with the death of the Israelite king, at Samaria and Jezreel respectively
(see above and observe the contradiction in 1 Kings xxi. 29
and xxii. 38). These and other critical questions in this section are
involved with (a) the probability that Elisha’s work belongs rather
to the accession of Jehu, with whose dynasty he was on most intimate
terms until his death some forty-five years later (2 Kings xiii. 14–21),
and (b) the problem of the wars between Israel and Syria which
appear to have begun only in the time of Jehu (x. 32). See Jew.
Quart. Rev. (1908), pp. 597–630, and Jews: History, § 11 seq.
In the annals of Jehu’s dynasty the editorial introduction
to Jehu himself is wanting (x. 32 sqq.), although Lucian’s
recension in x. 36 concludes in annalistic manner
the lives of Jehoram of Israel and Ahaziah of
Judah. The summary mentions the beginning of
Dynasty
of Jehu.
the Aramaean wars, the continuation of which is found in
the redactor’s account of his successor Jehoahaz (xiii. 1–9).
But xiii. 4–6 modify the disasters, and by pointing to the
“saviour” or deliverer (cf. Judg. iii. 9, 15) anticipate xiv. 27.
The self-contained account of his son Jehoash (xiii. 10–13) is
supplemented (a) by the story of the death of Elisha (vv. 14–21)
and (b) by some account of the Aramaean wars (vv. 22–25),
where v. 23, like vv. 4–6 (Lucian’s recension actually reads it
after v. 7), is noteworthy for the sympathy towards the northern
kingdom. Further (c) the defeat of Amaziah of Judah appears
in xiv. 8–14 after the annals of Judah, although from
an Israelite source (v. 11b Bethshemesh defined as belonging
to Judah, see also v. 15, and with the repetition of the concluding
statements in v. 15 seq., see xiii. 12 seq.). These features and
the transference of xiii. 12 seq. after xiii. 25 in Lucian’s recension
point to late adjustment. In Judaean history, Jehu’s reform
and the overthrow of Jezebel in the north (ix., x. 15–28) find
their counterpart in the murder of Athaliah and the destruction
of the temple of Baal in Judah (xi. 18). But the framework
is incomplete. The editorial conclusion of the reign of Ahaziah,
the introduction to that of Athaliah, and the sources for both are
wanting. A lengthy Judaean document is incorporated detailing
the accession of Joash and the prominence of the abruptly
introduced priest Jehoiada. The interest in the Temple and
temple-procedure is obvious; and both xi. and xii. have points
of resemblance with xxii. seq. (see below and cf. also xi. 4, 7, 11,
19, with 1 Kings xiv. 27 seq.). The usual epitome is found in
xi. 21–xii. 3 (the age at accession should follow the synchronism,
so Lucian), with fragments of annalistic matter in xii. 17–21
(another version in 2 Chron. xxiv. 23 sqq.). For Joash’s son
Amaziah see above; xiv. 6 refers to Deut. xxiv. 16, and 2 Chron.
xxv. 5–16 replaces v. 7 by a lengthy narrative with some interesting
details. Azariah or Uzziah is briefly summarized in xv. 1–7,
hence the notice in xiv. 22 seems out of place; perhaps the
usual statements of Amaziah’s death and burial (cf. xiv. 20b,
22b), which were to be expected after v. 18, have been supplemented
by the account of the rebellion (vv. 19, 20a, 21).[1] The
chronological notes for the accession of Azariah imply different
views of the history of Judah after the defeat of Amaziah; with
xiv. 17, cf. xiii. 10, xiv. 2, 23, but contrast xv. 1, and again v.
8.[2]
The important reign of Jeroboam (2) is dismissed as briefly as that of Azariah (xiv. 23–29). The end of the Aramaean war presupposed by v. 25 is supplemented by the sympathetic addition in v. 26 seq. (cf. xiii. 4 seq. 23). Of his successors Zechariah, Shallum and Menahem only the briefest records remain, now imbedded in the editorial framework (xv. 8–25). The summary of Pekah (perhaps the same as Pekahiah, the confusion being due to the compiler) contains excerpts which form the continuation of the older material in v. 25 (cf. also vv. 10, 14, 16, 19, 20). For an apparently similar adjustment of an earlier record to the framework see above on 1 Kings xv. 25–31, xvi. 8–25. The account of Hoshea’s conspiracy (xv. 29 seq.) gives the Israelite version with which Tiglath-Pileser’s own statement can now be compared. Two accounts of the fall of Samaria are given, one of which is under the reign of the contemporary Judaean Hezekiah (xvii. i–6, xviii. 9–12); the chronology is again intricate. Reflections on the disappearance of the northern kingdom appear in xvii. 7–23 and xviii. 12; the latter belongs to the Judaean history. The former is composite; xvii. 21–23 (cf. v. 18) look back to the introduction of calf-worship by Jeroboam (1), and agree with the compiler’s usual standpoint; but vv. 19–20 include Judah and presuppose the exile. The remaining verses survey types of idolatry partly of a general kind (vv. 9–12, 16a), and partly characteristic of Judah in the last years of the monarchy (vv. 16b, 17). The brief account of the subsequent history of Israel in xvii. 24–41 is not from one source, since the piety of the new settlers (v. 32–34a, 41) conflicts with the later point of view in 34b–40. The last-mentioned supplements the epilogue in xvii. 7–23, forms a solemn conclusion to the history of the northern kingdom, and is apparently aimed at the Samaritans.
III. Later History of Judah.—The summary of Jotham (xv. 32–38) shows interest in the Temple (v. 35) and alludes to the hostility of Pekah (v. 37) upon which the Israelite annals are silent. 2. Chron. xxvii. expands Judah. the former but replaces the latter by other not unrelated details (see Uzziah). But xv. 37 is resumed afresh in the account of the reign of Ahaz (xvi. 5 sqq.; the text in v. 6 is confused)—another version in 2 Chron. xxviii. 5 sqq.—and is supplemented by a description, evidently from the Temple records, in which the ritual innovations by “king Ahaz” (in contrast to “Ahaz” alone in vv. 5–9) are described (vv. 10–18). There is further variation of detail in 2 Chron. xxviii. 20–27. The summary of Hezekiah (xviii. 1–8) emphasizes his important religious reforms (greatly expanded in 2 Chron. xxix. seq. from a later standpoint), and includes two references to his military achievements. Of these v. 8 is ignored in Chron., and v. 7 is supplemented by (a) the annalistic extract in vv. 13–16, and (b) narratives in which the great contemporary prophet Isaiah is the central figure. The latter are later than Isaiah himself (xix. 37 refers to 681 B.C.) and reappear, with some abbreviation and rearrangement, in Isa. xxxvi.–xxxix. (see Isaiah). They are partly duplicate (cf. xix. 7 with vv. 28, 33; vv. 10–13 with xviii. 28–35), and consist of two portions, xviii. 17–xix. 8 (Isa. xxxvi. 2–xxxvii. 8) and xix. 9b–35 (Isa. xxxvii. 9b–36); to which of these xix. 9a and v. 36 seq. belong is disputed. 2 Chron. xxxii. (where these accounts are condensed) is in general agreement with 2 Kings xviii. 7, as against vv. 14–16. The poetical fragment, xix. 21–28, is connected with the sign in vv. 29–31; both seem to break the connexion between xix. 20 and 32 sqq. Chap. xx. 1–19 appears to belong to an earlier period in Hezekiah’s reign (see v. 6 and cf. 2 Chron. xxxii. 25 seq.); with vv. 1–11 note carefully the forms in Isa. xxxviii. 1–8, 21 seq., and 2 Chron. xxxii. 24–26; with xx. 12–19 (Isa. xxxix) contrast the brief allusion in 2 Chron. xxxii. 31. In v. 17 seq. the exile is foreshadowed. Use has probably been made of a late cycle of Isaiah-stories; such a work is actually mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxii. 32. The accounts of the reactionary kings Manasseh and Amon, although now by the compiler, give some reference to political events (see xxi. 17, 23 seq.); xxi. 7–15 refer to the exile and find a parallel in xxiii. 26 seq., and xxi. 10 sqq. are replaced in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 10–20 by a novel record of Manasseh’s penitence (see also ibid. v. 23 and note omission of 2 Kings xxiii. 26 from Chron).
Josiah’s reign forms the climax of the history. The usual framework (xxii. 1; 2, xxiii. 28, 30b) is supplemented by narratives dealing with the Temple repairs and the reforms of Josiah. These are closely related to xi. seq. (cf. xxii. 3–7 with xii. 4 sqq.), but show many signs of revision; xxii. 16 seq., xxiii. 26 seq., point distinctly to the exile, and xxiii. 16–20 is an insertion (the altar in v. 16 is already destroyed in v. 15) after 1 Kings xiii. But it is difficult elsewhere to distinguish safely between the original records and the later additions. In their present shape the reforms of Josiah are described in terms that point to an acquaintance with the teaching of Deuteronomy which promulgates the reforms themselves.[3]
- ↑ Both xiv. 22 and xv. 5 presuppose fuller records of which 2 Chron. xxvi. 6–7, 16–20 may represent merely later and less trustworthy versions.
- ↑ See F. Rühl, Deutsche Zeit. f. Geschichtwissens, xii. 54 sqq.; also Jews: History, § 12.
- ↑ See further the special study by E. Day, Journ. Bib. Lit. (1902), pp. 197 sqq.
