TEXT [Commentary]

6. The death of Jehu (10:32-36)

32 At about that time the LORD began to cut down the size of Israel’s territory. King Hazael conquered several sections of the country 33 east of the Jordan River, including all of Gilead, Gad, Reuben, and Manasseh. He conquered the area from the town of Aroer by the Arnon Gorge to as far north as Gilead and Bashan.

34 The rest of the events in Jehu’s reign—everything he did and all his achievements—are recorded in The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel.

35 When Jehu died, he was buried in Samaria. Then his son Jehoahaz became the next king. 36 In all, Jehu reigned over Israel from Samaria for twenty-eight years.

NOTES

10:32 to cut down. This is a good, rather literal translation of the infinitive leqatsoth [TH7096, ZH7894] (cf. Cogan and Tadmor 1988:117; also NRSV’s “began to trim off parts of Israel”).

Hazael. See the first note on 8:8 for details concerning this important Aramean king, including his eventual oppression (and outright annexation) of much of the land of Israel.

several sections of the country. See Cogan and Tadmor (1988:117) for details. Suffice it to say here that evidently the entirety of the Transjordanian regions of Israel were lost to Hazael. (“Aroer” in the south was located directly east of the Dead Sea, while “Bashan” corresponds to the present-day Golan Heights, northeast of the Sea of Galilee, stretching toward Damascus.) The overall irony of this extensive loss of territory will be evident: By abandoning the battle for Ramoth-gilead in 9:14-15, Jehu ultimately ceded all that territory to the enemy. (For the suggestion that Jehu actually became a vassal of Hazael, see the commentary on 9:1-13.)

10:34 are recorded in The Book of the History of the Kings of Israel. See “Literary Style” in the Introduction.

10:35 Jehoahaz. See 13:1-9.

10:36 Jehu reigned . . . for twenty-eight years. There has been no regnal total given for Jehu up to this point, presumably due to the insertion of the Elijah-Elisha material in chs 9–10 (cf. Gray 1970:563). Although the present location of this regnal total is odd, it is not without parallel (cf. 1 Kgs 2:11; 11:42; 14:20).

COMMENTARY [Text]

In the place where we would expect some discussion of Jehu’s 28-year reign, we find instead the abrupt notice that it was Yahweh’s will to “cut down” the size of Israel’s territory (10:32-33). King Hazael of Aram is the human agent, and we are probably meant to recall that he too was “anointed” by Elisha seemingly to take from Israel (see 8:11-12). As Hens-Piazza (2006:302) points out, “While we have a rather extended account of . . . Jehu’s violent coup to overthrow the house of Ahab in establishing himself as Israel’s ruler (2 Kgs 9–10), we have no account of his actual tenure as king.”

So what are we to make of the melancholy list of all the territories conquered by Hazael that we find here? I have already suggested (in the commentary on 10:1-17) that these verses may represent “editorial distaste” for Jehu’s extreme actions. Perhaps we find here a subtle dig at Jehu’s results, too—a mocking of the inevitable aftermath of so much murder, which was nothing less than abject military defenselessness against Israel’s perennial enemies to the east. But perhaps I am being too subtle here; maybe this notice is simply a resumption of the Deuteronomistic History which left off at 1 Kings 16:34 when it was interrupted by the insertion of the extensive Elijah-Elisha narratives (cf. Gray 1970:563). In any case, the sharp diminution of Jehu’s territory listed here is said to represent ultimately the very will of Yahweh (10:32). Still, we are also reminded that Jehu did enjoy a relatively long reign and that he was afforded a proper burial in his capital city, with his son Jehoahaz securely on the throne (eventualities quite different from those experienced by his predecessor). Earlier we were also reminded that his dynasty would endure (and, as we will later see, even at times flourish) for four generations—a generous span of history by the brutal standards of the ancient Near East. Such is our final impression of this strangely bold, clearly gifted, but bizarrely zealous king, who did not bring shalom [TH7965, ZH8934] (peace) but rather mirmah [TH4820, ZH5327] (treachery) to the land of Israel (cf. 9:23; see the commentary on 9:14-29).