_THE DYNASTY OF JEHU (continued)--JEROBOAM II_
B.C. 781-740
2 KINGS xiv. 23-29
If we had only the history of the kings to depend upon, we should
scarcely form an adequate conception either of the greatness of
Jeroboam II. or of the condition of society which prevailed in Israel
during his long and most prosperous reign of forty-one years (B.C.
781-740). In the Books of Chronicles he is merely mentioned
accidentally in a genealogy. The Second Book of Kings only devotes one
verse to him (xiv. 25) beyond the stock formulæ of connection so often
repeated. That verse, however, gives us at least a glimpse of his
great importance, for it tells us that "he restored the coast of
Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain." Those
two lines sufficiently prove to us that he was by far the greatest and
most powerful of all the kings of Israel, as he was also the
longest-lived and had the longest reign. His victories flung a broad
gleam of sunset over the afflicted kingdom, and, for a time, they
might have beguiled the Israelites into lofty hopes for the future;
but with the death of Jeroboam the light instantly faded away, and
there was no after-glow.
And this sudden brightness, if it deceived others, did not deceive the
prophets of the Lord. It happened in accordance with the promise of
Jehovah given by Jonah, the son of Amittai, of Gath-Hepher;[305] but
Amos and Hosea saw that the glory of the reign was hollow and
delusive, and that the outward prosperity did but "skin and film the
ulcerous place" below.
In truth, the possibility of this sudden outburst of success was due to
the very enemy who, within a few years, was to grind Israel to powder.
God pitied the deplorable overthrow of His chosen people: He saw that
there was neither slave nor freeman--"neither any shut up, nor any left
at large, nor any helper for Israel"; and in Jeroboam He gave them the
saviour who had been granted to the penitence of Jehoahaz.[306] It was,
so to speak, a last pledge to them of the love and mercy of Jehovah,
which gave them a respite, and would fain have saved them altogether, if
they had turned with their whole heart to Him. And, personally, Jeroboam
II. seems to have been one of the better kings. Not a single crime is
laid to his charge; for under the circumstances of its deep-rooted
continuance through the reigns of all his predecessors, it cannot be
deemed a heinous crime that he did not put down the symbolic cult of
Jehovah by the cherubic emblems at Dan and Bethel. The fact that he had
been named after the founder of the kingdom of Israel shows that the
kingdom was proud of the valiant and Heaven-commissioned rebel who had
thrown off the yoke of the house of Solomon. The house of Jehu admired
his policy and his institutions. The son of Nebat did not by any means
appear in the eyes of his people as only worthy of the monotonous
epitaph, "who made Israel to sin." It is true that now the voice of
prophecy in Israel itself began to denounce the concomitants of the
"calf-worship"; but the voices of the Jewish herdsman of Tekoa and of
the Israelite Hosea probably raised but faint murmurs in the ears of the
warrior-king, with whom they do not seem to have come into personal
contact. In no case would he rank them as equal in importance with the
fiery Elijah or the king-making Elisha, who had been for four
generations the counsellor of his race. Neither of those great prophets
had insisted on the Deuteronomic law of a centralised worship, nor had
they denounced the revered local sanctuaries with which Israel had been
so long familiar. Jonah, indeed--who, if legend be correct, had been the
boy of Zarephath, and the personal attendant of Elijah--had predicted
the king's unbroken success, and had neither made it conditional on a
religious revolution, nor, so far as we know, had in any way censured
the existing institutions.
What rendered Jeroboam's glory possible was the immediate paralysis
and imminent ruin of the power of Syria. The Israelitish king was
probably on good terms with Assyria, and, during this epoch, three
Assyrian monarchs had struck blow after blow against the house of
Hazael. Damascus and its dependencies had received shattering defeats
at the hands of Rammânirâri III., Shalmaneser III. (782-772), and
Assurdan III. (772-754). Rammânirâri had made expeditions against
Damascus (773) and Hazael (772), and Assurdan had invaded the Syrian
domains in 767, 755, and 754. Syria had more than enough to do to hold
her own in a struggle for life and death against her atrocious
neighbour. With Uzziah in Judah, Jeroboam II. seems to have been on
the friendliest terms; and probably Uzziah acted as a half-independent
vassal, united with him by common interests. The day for Assyria to
threaten Israel had not yet come. Syria lay in the path; and Assurdan
III. had been succeeded by Assurnirari, who gave the world the unusual
spectacle of a peaceful Assyrian king.
Jeroboam II., therefore, was free to enlarge his domains; and unless
there be a little patriotic exaggeration in the extent and reality of
his prowess, he exercised at least a nominal suzerainty over a realm
nearly as extensive as that of David. He first advanced against
Damascus, and so far "recovered" it as to make it acknowledge his
rule.[307] His father Joash had won back all the Israelite cities
which Benhadad III. had taken from Jehoahaz; and Jeroboam, if he did
not absolutely reconquer the district east of Jordan, yet kept it in
check and repressed the predatory incursions of the Emîrs of Moab and
Ammon.[308] He thus extended the border of Israel to the sea of the
Arabah and "the brook of willows" which divides Edom from Moab.[309]
But this was not all. He pushed his conquests two hundred miles
northwards of Samaria, and became lord of Hamath the Great. Ascending
the gorge of the Litâny between the chains of Libanus and Antilibanus,
which formed the northern limit of Israel, and following the river to
its source near Baalbek, he then descended the Valley of the Orontes,
which constitutes the "pass" or "entering in" of Hamath. Hamath was a
town of the Hittites, the most powerful race of ancient Canaan. They
were not of Semitic origin, but spoke a separate language. They were
the last great branch of the once famous and dominant Khetas, whose
former importance has only recently been revealed by their deciphered
inscriptions. A century and a half earlier the Hamathites had thrown
off the yoke of Solomon, and they governed nearly a hundred dependent
cities. In alliance with the Phœnicians and Syrians, they had been
valuable members of a league, which, though defeated, had long formed
a barrier against the southward movement of the Assyrians. How
striking was the conquest of this city by Jeroboam is shown by the
title of "Hamath the Great," bestowed upon it by the contemporary
prophets,[310] with whom literary prophecy begins.
The result of these conquests was unwonted peace. Agriculture once
more became possible, when the farmers of Israel were secure that
their crops would not be reaped by plundering Bedouîn. Intercourse
with neighbouring nations was revived, as in the golden days of
Solomon, though it was regarded with suspicion.[311] Civilisation
softened something of the old brutality. Prophecy assumed a different
type, and literature began to dawn.
But to this state of things there was, as we learn from the
contemporary prophets Amos and Hosea, a darker side. Of Jonah we know
nothing more; for it is impossible to see in the Book of Jonah much
more than a beautiful and edifying story, which may or may not rest on
some surviving legends. It differs from every other prophetic book by
beginning with the word "And," and its late origin and legendary
character cannot any longer be reasonably disputed.[312] We may hope,
therefore, that the Northern prophet, whose home was not far from
Nazareth, was not quite the morose and ruthless grumbler so strikingly
portrayed in the book which bears his name. Of any historical
intervention of his in the affairs of Jeroboam we know nothing further
than the recorded promise of the king's prosperity.
FOOTNOTES:
[305] 2 Kings xiv. 25-27. There are other allusions to the historic
events in 2 Kings x. 32, 33, xiii. 3-7, 22-25. Hitzig conjectures that
Isa. xv., xvi., are "a burden of Moab" quoted from Jonah.
[306] 2 Kings xiii. 5, "The Lord gave Israel a saviour"; xiv. 27, "And
He saved them by the hand of Jeroboam, the son of Joash." Some suppose
the saviour to be the Assyrian King.
[307] It had owned the feudal supremacy of David (2 Sam. viii. 6), and
Ahab had extorted the privilege of having bazaars there (1 Kings xx.
34). Considering how immense had been the resources of Damascus (2
Kings vi. 14), which had once been able to send to battle twelve
thousand war-chariots (_Eponym Canon_, p. 108) under Benhadad, we see
how fearfully the Syrian capital must have been weakened.
[308] If Isa. xv. 1, 2, refers to this invasion of Jeroboam II., as
Hitzig first conjectured, we infer that he had taken both Ar of Moab
(Rabbath) and Kir of Moab, a strong fortress on a hill, by night
assaults; and that he had also captured Dibon, Nebo, and Medeba, and
inflicted on them summary chastisement. It appears that the Moabites
had advanced northwards from the Arnon, while Hazael occupied
Ramoth-Gilead, and had seized part of the tribe of Reuben. Jeroboam
II. first expelled them, and then invaded their own proper country.
Hitzig conjectures that Isa. xv., xvi., are really an old
prophecy--perhaps by Jonah, son of Amittai--which Isaiah quotes, and
to which he adds two verses (Isa. xvi. 12, 13). In such overthrow Moab
must have learnt to be ashamed of Chemosh (Jer. xlviii. 13).
[309] Isa. xv. 7; Amos vi. 14.
[310] Amos vi. 2.
[311] Merchandise had hitherto been considered discreditable for a
pure Jew, so that a trader is called a Canaanite (Hos. xii. 7, 8).
[312] See the writer's _Minor Prophets_ ("Men of the Bible" Series),
pp. 231-243.