CHRONOLOGICAL NOTE TO CHAPTER 15

      To aid such readers as are interested in the somewhat difficult study of the chronology of that period, we shall put together the principal points in the elaborate note of Dr. Bahr in his Commentary on 2 Kings 8:16.  

     Let it be kept in mind that the accession of Jehu forms the beginning of a new period, alike as regards the kings of Israel and those of Judah, since both Joram and Ahaziah were killed in the revolution of Jehu. Again, let it be remembered that chronologists fix, with singular unanimity, on the year 884 B.C. as that of the accession of Jehu, and the death of the two kings.  

     Starting from this point, we can reckon backwards the years of the various kings in the past, and forward those of the reigns that followed Joram and Ahaziah. In all such computations we must, however, bear in mind that the Jews always reckoned the years of a king from the month Nisan to the month Nisan, so that not only a month, but even a day before or after that month, was reckoned as if it had been a year. It will be seen that the computation of a fragment of a year as if it had been a whole year must frequently introduce elements of confusion in our attempts to piece together the statements of the various reigns. And this must therefore be taken into account when studying the chronology. Keeping this in view, and counting backwards from the year 884, we have: —  

I. KINGS OF JUDAH.  

     1. Ahaziah: died, 884; reigned one, not full, year (2 Kings 8:26); acceded in 884 or 885 B.C.  

     2. Jehoram: died, 885; reigned eight years (2 Kings 8:17); acceded in 891 or 892 B.C.  

     3. Jehoshaphat: reigned twenty-five years (1 Kings 22:42); acceded in 916 or 917 B.C.  

II. KINGS OF ISRAEL.  

     1. Ahab: reigned twenty-two years (1 Kings 16:29). Since the first year of the reign of Jehoshaphat coincided with the fourth of that of Ahab, Ahab acceded in 919 or 920 B.C.  

     2. Ahaziah: reigned two, not full, years (1 Kings 22:51; cp. 2 Kings 3:1); acceded between 897 and 898 B.C.  

     3. Joram: died in 884; reigned twelve years (2 Kings 3:1); acceded between 895 and 896 B.C.  

Ill CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE YEARS OF REIGNS OF THE KINGS OF JUDAH AND ISRAEL.

     1. Ahaziah of Judah acceded in the twelfth year of Joram of Israel (2 Kings 8:26); and as the two were killed in 884, the one year of Ahaziah' s reign cannot have been a full one.  

     2. Jehoram of Judah acceded in the fifth year of Joram of Israel (2 Kings 8:16). Since Joram acceded in 895 or 896 B.C., the fifth year of his reign must have coincided with that of the accession of Jehoram in 891 or 892, as indicated under I.  

     3. Ahaziah of Israel, and his successor Joram, acceded respectively in the seventeenth (1 Kings 22:51) and the eighteenth (2 Kings 3:1) years of Jehoshaphat, whence it follows that (as indicated under II.) the two years of Ahaziah of Israel were not full years. As Jehoshaphat acceded in 916, the seventeenth year of his reign would have been 899 B.C., and the eighteenth year 898; while according to the computation under II., Ahaziah acceded between 897 and 898, and Joram between 895 and 896. But these slight discrepancies are, no doubt, due to the Jewish mode of calculating the years of a reign, to which reference has been made above.

     4. If we add the sum of the three reigns in Judah (Jehoshaphat twenty- five, Jehoram eight, and Ahaziah one), we obtain the number thirty- four, or, making allowance for the Jewish mode of computation, thirty- two years. Again, the sum of the three reigns in Israel (Ahab twenty- two, Ahaziah two, and Joram twelve), gives thirty-six, not full, years. The whole period from the reign of Ahab to that of Jehu comprised between thirty-five and thirty-six years, and as Jehoshaphat acceded in the fourth year of Ahab, the figures will be seen to agree.  

     The only exception to this general agreement in the numbers is 2 Kings 1:17, where we read that Joram acceded to the throne of Israel in the second year of Jehoram, king of Judah. But in that case Jehoshaphat could only have reigned seventeen, not twenty-five years; nor could Joram have become king of Israel in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat, as we read in 2 Kings 3:1; while Jehoram of Judah would have reigned not eight years (2 Kings 8: 17), but fourteen; nor would he have acceded in the fifth year of Joram (2 Kings 8: 16), but a year earlier than he. Accordingly, most writers have supposed a co-regency of Jehoram with his father Jehoshaphat. But as the text gives no hint of any such co-regency, 1 and there are many and strong reasons against this supposition, 2 Bahr has argued that the clause in 2 Kings 1:17, "in the second year of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah," is spurious. The usual chronological notice which, as always, appears in the account of a reign, follows in 2 Kings 3:1, and there correctly. As regards the comparison between the Biblical chronology and that based on the Assyrian monuments, we may note.  

     1. That there are differences between the two from the reign of Ahab to that of Manasseh, but that these differences strangely vary, for, whereas the differences amount in one reign perhaps to forty-three years and more, they amount in another reign to nine years, and even less. This varying divergence leads us to suppose that the differences may depend on something as yet to us unknown, and which, if known, might establish a harmony between the two chronologies.  

     2. As regards the capture of Samaria in 722, the two chronologies absolutely agree; and substantially also as regards the reign of Manasseh.  

     3. It is admitted that, taken as a whole, the record in the Bible of persons and events which were contemporaneous accords with the record on the Assyrian monuments, so that (despite any minor discrepancies) "the Bible receives, as regards chronology also, a happy vindication and confirmation" from the Assyrian monuments. 3