TEXT [Commentary]

2. Ahaziah rules in Judah (8:25-29)

25 Ahaziah son of Jehoram began to rule over Judah in the twelfth year of the reign of Joram son of Ahab, king of Israel.

26 Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem one year. His mother was Athaliah, a granddaughter of King Omri of Israel. 27 Ahaziah followed the evil example of King Ahab’s family. He did what was evil in the LORD’s sight, just as Ahab’s family had done, for he was related by marriage to the family of Ahab.

28 Ahaziah joined Joram son of Ahab in his war against King Hazael of Aram at Ramoth-gilead. When the Arameans wounded King Joram in the battle, 29 he returned to Jezreel to recover from the wounds he had received at Ramoth.[*] Because Joram was wounded, King Ahaziah of Judah went to Jezreel to visit him.

NOTES

8:25 Ahaziah. See the note on 1 Kgs 22:51 for the likely meaning of this name. As is the case with Joram/Jehoram, there are two “Ahaziahs” (an Israelite, and here a Judahite monarch) reigning around the same time; for both of these duplicated names, the correspondences can hardly be coincidental, since intermarriage has taken place (cf. Sweeney 2007:320).

in the twelfth year of the reign of Joram son of Ahab. In 9:29, this verse is essentially repeated, but with the ordinal “eleventh” rather than “twelfth,” an alteration which some scholars interpret as indicating that two different chronological systems were in use (i.e., so-called “antedating,” where the king’s first [partial] regnal year is reckoned as the first year of his reign; and “postdating,” where the first complete year of reign is reckoned as year one, with the partial “accession” year not counted in his regnal total at all [cf. Barnes 1991:6 n. 14]). Thus, Thiele (1983:58) uses this “double synchronism” to buttress his claim that the scribes of Judah switched from postdating to antedating just around this time, probably under the influence of Athaliah. (For an alternate interpretation, where the ordinal “twelfth” of the MT found here is emended to “eleventh,” see Cogan and Tadmor 1988:98.)

8:26 he reigned . . . one year. An anomalous total, representing probably only several months on the throne (assuming antedating practice; cf. Thiele 1983:101, Wiseman 1993:217; but contrast Tadmor, as cited in Barnes 1991:155 note h).

Athaliah, a granddaughter of King Omri of Israel. Lit., “Athaliah, daughter (bath) of Omri, king of Israel.” Most commentators, noting that bath [TH1323, ZH1426] can signify “granddaughter” as well as “daughter,” suggest that Athaliah was actually the daughter of Omri’s son Ahab and his notorious wife, Jezebel (so NLT). Cogan and Tadmor (1988:98-99) ­suggest “this Israelite princess proved herself to be cut from the same autocratic mold as her mother, Queen Jezebel, as shown in her seizing the throne in Jerusalem after the murder of her son by Jehu’s riders (11:1-3).” That Athaliah emulated Jezebel, no one would deny. But not all agree that she was literally Ahab’s daughter (cf. the unnamed woman in 8:18, who is probably Athaliah); see the notable suggestion of Katzenstein (1955:194-197; cf. Gray 1970:534) that Athaliah was indeed the daughter of Omri, and that she grew up as a young orphan at the court of Ahab, under the tutelage of Queen Jezebel (after all, the chronology is very tight if the traditional view is maintained). As far as the name Athaliah (‘athalyahu [TH6271A, ZH6976]) is concerned, it is clearly Yahwistic, but its exact meaning still eludes us (BDB 800 suggests tentatively, “Yah is exalted” [so also Hobbs 1985:138]; but see ABD 1.511 for other possibilities). In any case, I suspect that Jezebel did not choose the name!

8:27 evil example. Cf. the first note on 8:18.

8:28 Hazael. Concerning this important Aramean king, see the first note on 8:8.

Ramoth-gilead. Lit., “Heights of Gilead.” This was the infamous spot where King Ahab received his mortal wound (1 Kgs 22:34); see especially the note on 1 Kgs 22:3.

8:29 Ramoth. Heb., ramah [TH7413, ZH8229] (heights); probably, as the NLT mg ­indicates, this is an alternative form for Ramoth (i.e., Ramoth-gilead; cf. NIV, also Wiseman 1993:218).

COMMENTARY [Text]

“Like father, like son” is the theme of this brief section. And this is true in a number of respects: Ahaziah of Judah emulated his father Jehoram, just as Jehoram emulated the evil kings of Israel, Omri and his son Ahab (cf. 8:18, 27). And Ahab in turn emulated (to some degree) the pagan ways of Queen Jezebel. Athaliah, in turn, will emulate the ways of her queen mother, Jezebel (perhaps her literal mother as well; see the second note on 8:26). Like parent, like child—how true that is (cf. Prov 22:6, which may be a negative as well as a positive proverb [lit., “train up your child in the way he would go . . .”]; cf. Stuart 1984:51-52). Thus, I have jokingly commented to my students that I hope they picked their parents most carefully!

Influence of parents notwithstanding, the major issue in both this and the preceding section must be the dangers of intermarriage with foreigners, that is, nonbelievers (at that time, non-Israelites would normally worship their own national god, not Yahweh, the national God of Israel or Judah). Of course, most such intermarriages took place for diplomatic reasons, and in a real sense, the royal family of the northern kingdom of Israel did not fit completely into the category of “foreigners”; but still, the danger of foreign influence had long been recognized in Judah (highlighted especially in the book of Deuteronomy; cf. the note on 1 Kgs 11:2 for references), and for the Deuteronomistic Historian, the results of borrowing practices from non-believers can only be disastrous. To be sure, things get tricky when mothers-in-law get involved and arranged marriages take place, but the warning remains—marry the unbeliever, get the unbelief (thrown in for free, as it were). This is especially true when the marriage partner is vigorous in personality or from a home with parents of vigorous personalities. Ahaziah in his single year of reign (perhaps encompassing only several months or so; see the first note on 8:26), would hardly have done much actual harm, but the Deuteronomistic evaluation must nonetheless be given (see endnotes 1 and 2 of the Introduction for details; see also the case of Zimri of Israel who was apparently on the throne for only one week and yet was still roundly condemned by the Deuteronomist [1 Kgs 16:15-20]). As is generally the case, the history here is written with a clear contemporary agenda. And in this case it is that thou shalt not marry unbelievers (cf. 2 Cor 6:14, also the commentary on 1 Kgs 11:1-13 for Solomon’s particularly notorious failings in this area).