October 2020 – Authorized Version Blog

An explanation of the discrepancy of age found in 2 Chronicles 22:2:

"Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.''

Compare with 2 Kings 8:26:

"Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.''

==__==__==__==__==__==__==__==__==__==__==

During the reigns of Jehoshapat in the south [house of Judah] and Ahab in the north [house of Omri], it is possible that both of these houses sought to achieve control in their own ways over the twelve tribes, through inheritance and marriage alliances.

Thus we read in 2 Chronicles 18:1 that Jehoshaphat “joined affinity” with Ahab at some point after the third year of his reign,¹ possibly to this end.

This might also serve to explain the overlapping names of four heirs at this era, two Ahaziahs (one from each house) and two Jehoram/Jorams² (also one from each house).

Perhaps both houses were planning to establish their own lineage as the inheritors of both kingdoms, thus reuniting the “divided monarchy.”

To start with, Ahab’s order of succession was his son Ahaziah (the one who reigned in the north), and next in line was his other son Jehoram/Joram (the one who reigned in the north). This Ahaziah ruled for only one year (but two years counting inclusively, as the northern kings did³), he fell in the lattice at the beginning of 2 Kings and was succeeded by his brother (Jehoram/Joram) because he had no son.⁴ The Jehoram/Joram who reigned in the north would be the king within roughly a year of Ahab’s death, and this Jehoram/Joram reigned twelve years until Jehu purged the house of Omri.

Meanwhile, Jehoshaphat’s order of succession was his son Jehoram/Joram (the one who reigned in the south) and then presumably Jehoram’s own sons after him. However, this order of succession was also severely disturbed by unexpected events.

According to 2 Kings 8:26-27, it is known for a fact that Ahaziah (the one who reigned in the south) had his mother in Athaliah and was therefore a son-in-law of the house of Ahab, as it says.⁵ This second Ahaziah now became the heir apparent to Jehoram/Joram (the one who reigned in the south) unexpectedly, because according to the 2 Chronicles 21:16-17 narrative, all of Jehoram/Joram’s sons and wives were suddenly taken away by the Arabians leaving only one: Jehoahaz, which is another name for the Ahaziah in the south.⁶

Therefore, because of this slaughter, Jehoram/Joram of the south had no other choice but to name Ahaziah (of the south) as his successor. This occurred in his last year⁷ where he was named co-regent of Judah⁸ during Jehoram/Joram’s extreme sickness (2 Chronicles 21:18-19). In the following year, the southern Jehoram/Joram died, so Ahaziah in the south became sole ruler of Judah (2 Kings 8:25-26), noted there as the following year in Jehoram/Joram of the north’s reign.⁹ He only ruled one year of his own, because Jehu soon purged house of Omri (2 Kings 9). As we have explained, both kings (Jehoram/Joram of the north and Ahaziah of the south) were currently of the house of Omri at this point, becoming targets for Jehu.

Now an interesting set of circumstances seems to surround this situation, suggested by two odd statements in the Chronicles passage. It seems plausible that the second Ahaziah, who only reigned in Jerusalem for one year, had in previous years also been part of a plan to unite the two houses of Judah and Omri.¹⁰

It is stated in 2 Chronicles 22:9, upon his death, that he was a “son of Jehoshaphat” and they felt he should be buried with honors.¹¹ This does not require him to be a direct biological father, but the strength of the association might easily suggest it. We therefore suggest that this southern Ahaziah had his biological parents as Jehoshaphat and Athaliah, daughter of Ahab.

An interesting piece of information is gained by the two statements given in 2 Chronicles 22:1-2. The chroniclist says that Ahaziah was “his [Jehoram/Joram’s] youngest son”¹² and yet that he was forty-two years old.¹³ We glean from 2 Chron. 21:20 that Jehoram/Joram himself was only forty years old upon his demise!¹⁴ Therefore, it is not possible that he is the direct father but only the father-in-law, which would be the case given our assumptions since, after Jehoshaphat died, this Jehoram/Joram¹⁵ married Athaliah daughter of Omri, and, by this strategic marriage the consequence is that the Ahaziah who reigned in the south became his son-in-law, despite being two years older. Then the unexpected massacre of all of Jehoram/Joram’s own sons meant, he had no choice but to name his son-in-law by Athaliah as the heir of Judah, which would explain why the chroniclist thought it noteworthy to add that this Ahaziah was “the youngest.” There were no younger heirs remaining, forcing him to name a 42-year-old son-in-law as heir.

Now another unusual piece of information that very much obscures this story, is the fact that, in the Kings account (2 Kings 8:26) the same man’s age is given as 22 and not 42. Almost all commentaries assume at this point that the Chronicles account must have a scribal error, but let us examine another possibility for explaining this.

If we continue with our assumption that Jehoshaphat directly fathered Ahaziah (who eventually reigned in the south), we ask ourselves why this situation might have occurred in the first place. It was noted before that 2 Chronicles 18:1 specifically tells, that at least for some period of time, Jehoshaphat “joined affinity” with Ahab, father of Athaliah. There may have been some kind of short-lived plan to merge the two houses by forming this (hypothetical) union of Jehoshaphat himself with the daughter of Ahab. Thus Ahaziah the son of Athaliah was conceived directly via Jehoshaphat. However, later Jehoshaphat decided to name his son Jehoram/Joram as heir of Judah and only by unexpected situation did Ahaziah come to inherit this throne.

Let us go back to the reigns of Jehoshaphat and Ahab. Supposing that both houses sought to extend their own lineage to inherit the throne of a united monarchy, it would make sense that each house, in periods of rivalry, would try to extend their own claims over the whole twelve tribes of Israel. After the birth of the southern Ahaziah, these two houses might have experienced a rise in hostility (comp. 1 Kings 22:49¹⁶). It is posited that Jehoshapat during his reign attempted to claim the throne of Judah for one of his sons, and the throne of Israel for the other, each being the two sons of Jehoshaphat, the southern Jehoram/Joram and the southern Ahaziah respectively.

We note that, towards the very end of Ahab’s life, his son the northern Ahaziah was placed by Ahab as the regent over the north. But this is the very same year that the southern Jehoram/Joram was raised to the regency of the south by Jehoshaphat (comp. 1 Kings 22:51, 2 Kings 1:17, 2 Kings 3:1). The following year is the year Ahab died. Perhaps the two rival kings were each trying to set up their own dynasties to inherit the northern throne.

After the death of Ahab, the most senior members of Omri would be Ahab’s two sons the northern Ahaziah and Jehoram/Joram, as well as the (posited) son of Jehoshaphat, the southern Ahaziah. Obviously, Jehoshaphat, having outlived Ahab, would now be attempting to rally the northern kingdom around his candidate for the northern throne, against the northern brothers who were first generation descendants of Ahab. After the northern Ahaziah fell through the lattice and died in the first year after Ahab’s death, the northern kingdom would seem to have just two candidates remaining. The northern Jehoram, last remnant of Ahab’s sons, would be clinging onto his throne against the combined efforts of Jehoshaphat and his two regents who would each be set to inherit one of the thrones. In fact, it is likely that, similar to Jehoshephat’s son Jehoram/Joram (who was elevated to the sub-regent of the south when Ahab’s death seemed imminent and/or in response to Ahab naming his heir), Jehoshaphat would have had reasons to elevate his chosen heir for the north even sooner. The southern Ahaziah would be the only descendant of Omri under Jehoshaphat’s control, a fact he would use to promote this son’s candidacy as the true successor of Ahab. This would then explain the statement in 2 Kings 8:26 that Ahaziah (the son of Jehoshaphat) was twenty-two years old when he began to reign, because this was his age at the beginning of his reign in the capacity as the rival claimant king of Israel to the north. He would have continued to assert this claim all the way until the death of his half-brother in the south (the southern Jehoram/Joram) who unexpectedly lost all of his family and heirs. Therefore he had been reigning since he was age 22 (being promoted by his father Jehoshaphat), but, at age 42 he was unexpectedly required to inherit the throne of Judah, being the last remaining possible heir. In that specific capacity, he only reigned (in Jerusalem) one year.

It is well-known that in the Chronicles version of the account, in general the writer is focused on the kingdom of Judah, and hardly at all on the northern kingdom. Therefore, he would instead give the southern Ahaziah’s age upon becoming king of Judah (42) because he is focusing on Judah, rather than his age at being promoted to co-regent¹⁷ by Jehoshaphat (22). The writer of the Kings account would have instead given his age upon starting his claimancy to the northern kingdom first. But in either case he only reigned one year in Jerusalem during his final year, and this would be important to clarify in either case.

This also explains the extra, unusual statement given in 2 Kings 9:29, which is to clarify that this Ahaziah had been reigning in Judah specifically only since the eleventh year of the northern Jehoram/Joram.¹⁸ This statement would be necessary to clarify the details, if, in fact, Ahaziah had also had an earlier reign where he was promoted to be ruler of the northern kingdom, which is what evidence not only limited to this verse suggests.

One last interesting observation is the fact that Ahaziah of the south and Jehoram/Joram of the north seemed to be in friendship and alliance in the last year before Jehu’s purge. This quick reconciliation between the two, might seem to suggest there was yet another plot to place sons of Omri on both thrones. The fact Ahaziah of the south was spared from the wholesale destruction of Jehoram/Joram of the south’s lineage, leaving himself as the sole heir, might not have been an accident.

However, neither side seems to have predicted that Jehu, an outsider would appear the following year to destroy the whole remnant of Omni. The narrative is in 2 Kings 9:16-27. Nothing the two remaining kings could do would turn him away. The only remaining piece was the queen Athaliah who remained in control of the south for seven woeful years. She immediately rose to destroy the remnant of Judah’s lineage, however another woman named Jehosheba rescued a single son of the king named Jehoash/Joash, who was her nephew.

Jehoash subsequently became the grandfather to Uzziah/Azariah, officially listed by Matthew as the next successive generation to Jehoram/Joram (of the south), the king whose lineage had apparently been “taken away” by the Arabians (2 Chronicles 21:16-17), possibly a plot of the house of Omri. This might suggest that perhaps, there had been survivors of that attack also, which could have restored the lineage by union with the next two kings of Judah. The immediate (rescued) son of Ahaziah of the south would have been at minimum 1/4 of the house of Omri, probably 3/4, which indicates the reason why Matthew in chapter 1 leaves out him, his father, and his son, three kings total in his list. The wickedness of Athaliah to extend her purge even to those of her own grandchildren, just to attempt to wipe out the lineage of Judah is also surprising. –End of theory.

⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜__⚜⚜

Month: October 2020

The age of Ahaziah in Chronicles