KINGS
657
KINGS
Phacee became king in the 52nd year of Azarias.
Achaz " " " " 17th " " Phacee.
Osee 12th " " Achaz.
Total 81 years to Osee. Azarias reigned 52 years Joatham " 16 " Achaz " 16^ "
Total 84 years to Ezechias. Subtract SI years to Osee There remain 3 years of Osee till Ezechias be- came king.
That the reverse is not the case, that is, that the twelfth year of Achaz is not the result of a calculation, is shown by the fact that the other possible calcula- tions would produce the fourth, and not the twelfth, year of Achaz . The other reckonings are as follows : — 32 years of Azarias 52 years of .\zarias.
20 " " Phacee 16 " " Joatham.
Total 72^ " to Osee 6S " to Achaz.
Less 68^ " to Achaz There remain 4 " of Achaz when Osee becomes king. The year 68 of Azarias = 17 Phacee = 16 Joatham = .\chaz.
^ 4 4 £_
- 20 Joatham = 4 Achaz =
From this it appears that not the " twelfth year of Achaz", but the "twentieth year of Joatham", is
(1) That which is added, II Par., xxx, ,5-9, 11, 25;
and x-xxi, 1, about the first year of Ezechias, was not
possible while a king ruled in the kingdom of the Ten
Tribes.
(2) If Ezechias became king six or seven years be- fore the capture of Samaria, consequently in 728-7, then his reign of twenty-nine years must have ended in 699-8, and his recovery must have taken place fifteen years before, about 713. On this occasion the promise is made to Ezechias that he and his city Jerusalem shall be delivered "out of the hand of the king of the .\ssyrians" (IV Kings, xx, 6). This king was Sennacherib, who ascentled the throne only in 705, while this event, according to Assyrian sources, took place not earlier than 701. There is no ground for assuming that strained relations existed between Ezechias and Sargon (722-705), who, nevertheless, just about 71-3, was engaged with the Philistines, and m 711 conquered Azotus (cf. Is., xx, 1). The cause of serious animosity between Ezechias and Assyria was evidently the embassy of Merodach-Baladan, who had no relations whatever with the King of Juda, and who did not send to him a magnificent embassy to congratulate him on his recovery without some ul- terior motive. We cannot but regard this as an ex-
Juda
Year
Israel
Year
Remarks
Juda
Year
Israel
Year
Remarks
B. C.
B. c.
B.C.
B. c
David
1012
Joas — co-
Solomon
972
reign
799
37 Joas of Juda. Cf.
(Building of the
IV Kings, xiii, 1,
Temple)
969
with V. 10, ibid.
Roboam
933-2
(Jero- 1
(boam If
933-2
" king
797
After his father's
death.
Abiam
915
Amasias
796
Asa
913-2
Nadab
912-1
iJero- 1
( boam II f
782
Reigned 31, not 41,
years.
Baasa
911-0
Azarias
768-7
15 years after the
Ela
8S8-7
death of Joas of
Zambri
SS7-6
Israel. "Seven
Amri
8S7-6
SS2
III Kings, xvi, 15, 16
III Kings, xvi. 23.
.^fter the death of
Thebni (v. 22)
and twentieth
year of Jeroboam"
is erroneous.
Reigned 32, not
Achab
875*
52, years.
Josaphat — co-
reign
Zacharias
750
IS, not 38, of Aza-
874
39 Asa. Cf. II Par..
rias.
xvi. 12
.loatham— regent
750-
4 Achab
49
16 before Achaz.
- ' king
871*
Sellum
749-8
19 Azarias.
Ochozias
854*
Shortly before Nisan .
853. As late as
the summer of 854 ,
Achab fought with
Benadad against
Salmanasar
king
736-5
Manahem
Phaceia
Phacee
749-8
738-7
737-6
19 Azarias.
30 Azarias.
32 Azarias.
His third year as king is mentioned in II Par., xxvii, 5
Joram
853*
18 Josaphat. IV
Kings, viii, 16, be-
ing supposed to
read: "In the
twentieth year of
Josaphat" (from
Achaz
734-3
Osee
730
723
4. not 17, Phacee
As vassal of Assyria
after the death of
Phacee. who only
ruled 7 years.
Independent. 12
Achaz.
874 on)
Joram
849*
End of
Ochozias— co-
11 Joram of Israel.
Osee
722-1
Capture of Samaria
reign
843
Cf. II Par., xxi. 18
and 19, withxxii,4
Ezechias
718-7
"Third year of
Osee" is incorrect.
king
842
12 Joram of Israel
Manasses
689-8
Reigned 45, not 55,
Athalia
842-1
Jehu
842*
years.
Joas
836-5
Joachaz
814-3
.\mon
Josias
Joachaz
Joakim
Joachin
Sedecias
End of Sedecias
643
641
610* 609* 598* 598 587
Capture of Jerusa-
reckoned. The calculation was correct in reganl to
Osee's beginning as vassal of Assyria. But some one
else confused this with the declaration of indepen-
dence of Osee in the twelfth year of .\ehaz. and thus
arrived at the "third year of Csee" before the begin-
ning of Ezechias, whence resulted further synchronis-
tic statements between Osee and Ezechias. That
these synchronisms are not historical, but must have
been iritroduced into the Bible by a "speculator", is
proved by what follows: —
VIII.^i2
pression of the unfriendly attitude towards the As-
sjTians which was favoured by Ezechias. This is the
light in which we can understand the war of the
-Assyrian against Juda. But cause and effect must be
connected according to time. As to the year 713 or
shortly afterwards (for the delivery of Ezechias), there
can, then, he no discussion. The year 703 is probably
correct; Merodach-Baladan had then regained the
throne of Babylon, and Sennacherib already ruled in
AssjTia. Thus the recovery of Ezechias would have
