1, 2 (= 1 Kings xv. 1, 2).
Abijah succeeds.
¹In the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam began Abijah to reign over Judah.
1. Abijah] Called Abijam in 1 Kings (LXX. Ἀβιού, i.e. Abijahu).
²Three years reigned he in Jerusalem: and his mother’s name was Micaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam.
2. Micaiah] Read with LXX., Maacah; compare note on xi. 20. Torrey, however, (Ezra Studies, p. 217) suggests that some words have fallen out of the text through similarity of ending. He would read “And his mother’s name was Maacah <daughter of Absalom, and he took to wife> Maacah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah”: the inconsistency as to Maacah’s parentage between this verse and xi. 20 would disappear, and the suggestion that Maacah was grand-daughter of Absalom (see xi. 20, note) would be unnecessary.
3–20 (no parallel in 1 Kings).
The Battle of Zemaraim.
The account of Abijah’s astonishing triumph over the host of Jeroboam should be compared with xiv. 9–15 (Asa’s victory) and xx. 1–30 (Jehoshaphat’s victory; see Introduction pp. xlix f.), passages which like the present are nowhere else recorded, and are essentially unhistorical. No reliance can be placed on the high numbers of the opposing armies (verse 3), on the pious speech ascribed to king Abijah which neatly and forcibly expresses the ecclesiastical view of schismatic Israel held by the Chronicler and his school (verses 4–12), or on the appalling carnage wrought in the Israelite army (verse 17). The tale, in fact, is of a markedly midrashic character, i.e. a narrative intended to edify and not to be treated as serious history. But in all such cases it is fair to distinguish between the form and the substance: at least the bare substance of the tale. Thus in the present instance the judgement stated above does not preclude the possibility that war took place between Abijah and Jeroboam, and that the former gained a useful success over the more powerful Northern Kingdom. The absence from Kings of any mention of such victory is a serious objection; but it is not fatal, unless we take the view—objected to in the Introduction § 5—that the Chronicler had absolutely no sources, oral or written, of the faintest value for pre-exilic days apart from the canonical writings. Yet it must be admitted that it would be not unnatural to the workings of the Chronicler’s mind to infer that some signal success must have rewarded so near a descendant of David if only to compensate in part for Rehoboam’s disastrous reign and at any rate to punish the glaring iniquity of a schismatic and idolatrous Israel. Judging from the brief account of Abijah in 1 Kings xv. 1–7, we may conclude that the continued hostility between North and South was a fact, but that it is extremely improbable there was a reliable tradition (if any at all) regarding a great Judean victory in his reign: see note on Zemaraim below.
³And Abijah joined battle with an army of valiant men of war, even four hundred thousand chosen men: and Jeroboam set the battle in array against him with eight hundred thousand chosen men, who were mighty men of valour.
3. four hundred thousand ... eight hundred thousand] The numbers are of course vastly in excess of any historic possibility; compare the notes on xi. 1, xiv. 8, and especially that on xvii. 14.
⁴And Abijah stood up upon mount Zemaraim, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, and said, Hear me, O Jeroboam and all Israel;
4. Abijah stood up] Abijah attempts conference before beginning civil war, not simply because his was the weaker side numerically but because he had a telling appeal to make to the revolted tribes (verses 8, 12). Jeroboam breaks off the conference after using it to cover his stratagem (verse 13).
Zemaraim] A Zemaraim is mentioned in Joshua xviii. 22 as one of the cities of Benjamin, whereas here Mount Zemaraim is assigned to Ephraim. The natural inference is that the battle took place on the border of the two kingdoms. The tradition that a battle took place here between North and South, and perhaps between Abijah and Jeroboam, may be correct.
⁵ought ye not to know that the Lord, the God of Israel, gave the kingdom over Israel to David for ever, even to him and to his sons by a covenant of salt? ⁶Yet Jeroboam the son of Nebat, the servant of Solomon the son of David, rose up, and rebelled against his lord.
5. a covenant of salt] Salt was necessary for the efficacy of a sacrifice (Leviticus ii. 13), so that Covenant of salt became a phrase for a sure covenant (Numbers xviii. 19). The sacredness of the bond which is acknowledged among the Arabs between two persons who have “eaten salt” together as host and guest is common knowledge. It is not, however, necessary that salt should be taken; any food, e.g. milk, will serve (W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 270).
⁷And there were gathered unto him vain men, sons of Belial¹, which strengthened themselves against Rehoboam the son of Solomon, when Rehoboam was young and tenderhearted, and could not withstand them. ⁸And now ye think to withstand the kingdom of the Lord in the hand of the sons of David; and ye be a great multitude, and there are with you the golden calves which Jeroboam made you for gods.
7. sons of Belial] margin sons of worthlessness. The general sense “worthless persons” or rather “vile scoundrels” (for gross wickedness is implied) is clear, but the precise meaning of Belial has not yet been determined. The etymology of the word is quite obscure, see Encyclopedia Biblia I. 525 f.
young] Literally a child. If this word is to be literally understood, the statement made is inconsistent with xii. 13, where it is said that Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign. It is possible, however, that the word is used metaphorically to describe one who was young (as indeed his conduct showed) in experience of government; so Solomon (1 Kings iii. 7) calls himself a little child, by which he meant simply to express his consciousness of the smallness of his own ability when compared with the greatness of the task which lay before him, compare 1 Chronicles xxix. 1. A similar difficulty arises in regard to the age of Solomon, see Encyclopedia Britannica s.v. Solomon.
tenderhearted] i.e., according to Hebrew phraseology, weak in understanding, the heart being considered to be the seat of the mind. Or we may translate the Hebrew phrase as in Deuteronomy xx. 8, fainthearted.
⁹Have ye not driven out the priests of the Lord, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and have made you priests after the manner of the peoples of other lands? so that whosoever cometh to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, the same may be a priest of them that are no gods.
9. driven out] see note on xi. 14.
after the manner of the peoples of other lands] i.e. who, unlike Israel, had no special class from which alone their priests were taken. Possibly, following the LXX., we should read from the people of the land (i.e. anyone who chose to apply, whether a Levite or not), compare 1 Kings xii. 31, xiii. 33.
to consecrate himself] Literally to fill his hand. Moses is directed (Exodus xxix. 1 ff.) to ordain Aaron and his sons priests by three ceremonies: (1) by anointing them, (2) by filling their hands, i.e. by presenting them with victims upon which they laid their hands, (3) by hallowing them, i.e. by sprinkling some of the blood of the victim upon them.
a young bullock and seven rams] Aaronic priests were consecrated with a young bullock and two rams (Exodus xxix. 1).
¹⁰But as for us, the Lord is our God, and we have not forsaken him; and we have priests ministering unto the Lord, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites in their work:
10. in their work] sc. ministering unto the Lord, as above. Part of the ideal of the Priestly Code was that the Levites should be restricted to the duty of helping the priests, and should be prevented from executing priestly functions themselves. With this ideal the Chronicler plainly sympathised, but it could not always be realised.
¹¹and they burn unto the Lord every morning and every evening burnt offerings and sweet incense: the shewbread also set they in order upon the pure table; and the candlestick of gold with the lamps thereof, to burn every evening: for we keep the charge of the Lord our God; but ye have forsaken him.
11. every morning and every evening] Exodus xxix. 38–42.
sweet incense] Exodus xxx. 7.
the shewbread also set they in order] Literally and an ordering of bread [they set in order]. The Hebrew phrase used here for “shewbread” signifies bread arranged as for an offering. Another term is “bread of the presence,” i.e. bread set forth continually before the Lord (Exodus xxv. 30). See 1 Chronicles ix. 32 (note).
the candlestick] Exodus xxv. 31 ff., xl. 24, 25.
¹²And, behold, God is with us at our head, and his priests with the trumpets of alarm to sound an alarm against you. O children of Israel, fight ye not against the Lord, the God of your fathers; for ye shall not prosper.
12. the trumpets of alarm] (Numbers x. 9). Abijah here threatens his opponents with a jihād or holy war.
¹³But Jeroboam caused an ambushment to come about behind them: so they were before Judah, and the ambushment was behind them. ¹⁴And when Judah looked back, behold, the battle was before and behind them: and they cried unto the Lord, and the priests sounded with the trumpets.
13. Jeroboam caused an ambushment] While Abijah was endeavouring to shake the fidelity of the Northern army, the Northern leader secures a tactical advantage. The greater the advantages of the Israelites and the more disastrous the position ascribed to the army of Judah, so much the more glorious is the victory which Judah achieves by its reliance on Jehovah.
¹⁵Then the men of Judah gave a shout: and as the men of Judah shouted, it came to pass, that God smote Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah. ¹⁶And the children of Israel fled before Judah: and God delivered them into their hand.
15. gave a shout] This shout had the character of a religious function; compare Joshua vi. 10, 16; Judges vii. 20, where the same Hebrew word is used.
God smote Jeroboam] Compare xiv. 12. Supernatural aid secures the victory.
¹⁷And Abijah and his people slew them with a great slaughter: so there fell down slain of Israel five hundred thousand chosen men.
17. The Chronicler has little or no interest in military matters as such, and is heedless of probability so far as the numbers he mentions are concerned. They must be sufficiently immense to enhance the power of Jehovah and to convey the impression that the days of old were mighty days. Comparison has been made with the phrase “a hundred and twenty thousand in one day” (xxviii. 6), and from the absence of the words “in one day,” it has been argued that the present passage refers to the losses of the whole campaign. Even so the figure, 500,000, is an immense exaggeration.
¹⁸Thus the children of Israel were brought under at that time, and the children of Judah prevailed, because they relied upon the Lord, the God of their fathers.
18. because they relied] Compare note on xii. 2.
¹⁹And Abijah pursued after Jeroboam, and took cities from him, Beth-el with the towns thereof, and Jeshanah with the towns thereof,
19. Beth-el] Beth-el was apparently subsequently recovered by the Northern Kingdom; compare 2 Kings x. 29. But, as it is very doubtful whether this section has any historical basis (see the head-note, xiii. 3), Beth-el may never have come under the rule of Abijah as is here stated. Nothing is said, be it noted, of the capture of the golden calf.
Jeshanah] Nothing is certainly known of this place, which is mentioned here only. It has been identified with Ain Sīnia, a little to the north of Beth-el.
Ephron] so the Kethīb, whereas the Authorized Version following the Ḳerī has Ephrain. Ephrain is a later form of the name Ephron, as Shamrain (Ezra iv. 10, 17) is of Shomron (Samaria). The place has been identified with eṭ-Ṭaiyebeh, a place south-east of Ain Sīnia and north-east of Beitin (Beth-el). It was probably the city called Ephraim, to which our Lord retired after the raising of Lazarus (John xi. 54).
²⁰and Ephron¹ with the towns thereof. Neither did Jeroboam recover strength again in the days of Abijah: and the Lord smote him, and he died.
20. the Lord smote him, and he died] The same phrase is used of the death of Nabal (1 Samuel xxv. 38); it implies suddenness or some other unusual circumstance (compare Acts xii. 23, the death of Herod Agrippa). 1 Kings xiv. 20 says simply Jeroboam ... slept with his fathers.
21, 22.
The Epilogue of Abijah’s Reign.
²¹But Abijah waxed mighty, and took unto himself fourteen wives, and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters.
21. fourteen wives] The many wives are mentioned here as a symbol of the wealth and state of Abijah.
²²And the rest of the acts of Abijah, and his ways, and his sayings, are written in the commentary of the prophet Iddo.
22. his ways] The Chronicler takes a much more favourable view of Abijah than Kings, where it is said of him that “he walked in all the sins of his father...” (1 Kings xv. 3), and received favour from Jehovah only on account of the merits of David. Evidently the Chronicler deemed it fitting to fasten on the fact of the favour, perhaps because he felt it imperative that Jeroboam should receive from the next king of Judah the punishment for his sins which Rehoboam could not inflict.
in the commentary] Hebrew Midrash. See Introduction, § 5, p. xxxi.
Iddo] See note on ix. 29.
1–5 (compare 1 Kings xv. 9–15).
The Religious Policy of Asa.
In Kings the reign of Asa is reviewed with entire approval, according to Chronicles his conduct was marred only by the lack of faith manifested in his reliance on the king of Syria (see xvi. 1–10), and in his recourse to physicians at the close of his reign (xvi. 12).
¹So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David, and Asa his son reigned in his stead: in his days the land was quiet ten years. ²And Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the Lord his God:
1. ten years] These ten years of rest are naturally to be assigned to the beginning of Asa’s reign; later on there was a rest of twenty years (compare xv. 10 with xv. 19). The number ten here makes a discrepancy with 1 Kings, for Baasha became king of Israel in the third year of Asa (1 Kings xv. 28, 33), and “there was war between Asa and Baasha all their days” (1 Kings xv. verse 32). If, however, we allow some latitude to the language both of 1 Kings and of Chronicles, the discrepancy becomes unimportant.
³for he took away the strange altars, and the high places, and brake down the pillars¹, and hewed down the Asherim; ⁴and commanded Judah to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, and to do the law and the commandment.
3. he took away] In 1 Kings xv. 12, 13 he is said to have put away the sodomites, and all the idols that his fathers had made; and also “the abominable image” which Maacah, his mother, had made. These remarks are here ignored by the Chronicler, probably because they would be out of harmony with the comparatively pious character he has ascribed to Asa’s predecessors, Rehoboam and Abijah. They are given, however, in xv. 16, 17, where see note.
the strange altars] i.e. altars belonging to gods other than Jehovah.
and the high places] a direct contradiction of 1 Kings xv. 14, where it is said “But the high places were not taken away: nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect with the Lord all his days.” This remarkable contrast affords a vivid illustration of the different standpoints of Kings and Chronicles In Kings the removal of the high-places is the great reform of later days effected by Hezekiah (1 Kings xviii. 4, 22), by Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 8). To the Chronicler, who believed that the law centralising the worship of Jehovah in Jerusalem was in force from the Mosaic age, the abolition of the high-places was felt to be a minimum of reform and must surely have been carried out by any king with a claim to piety. See also the note on xv. 17.
the pillars] LXX. τὰς στήλας. The “pillar” or “obelisk,” Hebrew Maṣṣēbāh, was a monolith standing by an altar as a symbol of the god worshipped at the altar. In later days an image took the place of the pillar, i.e. the mere symbol was succeeded by the likeness of the god. (W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites², pp. 203 ff., and for illustrations of those recently discovered at Gezer see Macalister, Bible Side-lights, or Driver, Modern Research as illustrating the Bible, p. 63.)
and hewed down the Asherim] An Ashērah (plural Ashērim and Ashēroth) was a wooden pole planted beside an altar as the symbol of a deity. It appears to have been a survival of tree-worship, as the Maṣṣēbāh was a survival of stone-worship. The Ashērah of itself did not represent any particular deity, but it could be carved to bear the symbol of any special god or goddess, e.g. of Ashtarte. (W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites², pp. 186 ff.) Probably the term Ashērah was used in reference to the living sacred trees, which are still common in Palestine: see the present writer’s edition of the Mishna tractate, ‘Aboda Zara, pp. 60 f.
⁵Also he took away out of all the cities of Judah the high places and the sun-images: and the kingdom was quiet before him.
5. the sun-images] Compare xxxiv. 4; Isaiah xvii. 8, xxvii. 9. The Hebrew word (“ḥamman”) is of uncertain meaning and the supposed connection with heat or the sun is unsatisfactory. On the whole the evidence points to the conclusion that the “ḥamman” was a stone pillar associated with the altar, and much the same as the “Maṣṣēbāh,” the difference perhaps being that the former was artificially shaped, the latter was of natural stone (see article Baal in Hastings’ Dictionary of Religion and Ethics, pp. 287, 288).
6–8.
Defensive Measures of Asa.
From xvi. 1–6 = 1 Kings xv. 17–22, it appears that there was a strong and probably a reliable tradition ascribing to Asa activity in building defensive townships in Judah. It is likely that the present verses with their vague reference to strongly built cities with no mention of their number or names are only an expansion of the more precise references in xvi. 6. The Chronicler has assigned the narrative given in xvi. 1–6 (the war with Baasha) to the close of Asa’s reign (for reasons noted under xvi. 1), and he obviously wanted something to occupy the ten years of peace with which—according to his story—the reign of Asa opened. This is conveniently found in a general allusion to building and fortification.
⁶And he built fenced cities in Judah: for the land was quiet, and he had no war in those years; because the Lord had given him rest. ⁷For he said unto Judah, Let us build these cities, and make about them walls, and towers, gates, and bars; the land is yet before us, because we have sought the Lord our God; we have sought him, and he hath given us rest on every side. So they built and prospered. ⁸And Asa had an army that bare bucklers and spears, out of Judah three hundred thousand; and out of Benjamin, that bare shields and drew bows, two hundred and fourscore thousand: all these were mighty men of valour.
8. that bare bucklers and spears ... that bare shields and drew bows] LXX., δύναμις ὁπλοφόρων (= ὁπλιτῶν) αἰρόντων θυρεοὺς καὶ δόρατα ... πελτασταὶ καὶ τοξόται. The Chronicler divides Asa’s army into the heavy-armed men belonging to Judah and the light-armed bowmen belonging to Benjamin. Asa apparently had no chariots. “Bucklers” and “shields” should be transposed as in ix. 15.
of Judah three hundred thousand ... of Benjamin ... two hundred and fourscore thousand] The total is 580,000. Under Asa’s successor, Jehoshaphat, the numbers are (xvii. 14–18), Judah 780,000, Benjamin 380,000, making a total of 1,160,000, i.e. twice the total given above. The moral which the Chronicler would enforce by these figures seems to be that Judah was strong in the early days of Asa, while Asa showed faith in God, and that it became still stronger under his really religious successor, Jehoshaphat. Regarding the exaggeration of these figures, see the notes on xi. 1, and xvii. 14.
9–15 (no parallel in Kings).
Asa’s victory over Zerah:
the Battle of Mareshah.
The present passage has much the same midrashic character as the account of Abijah’s victory related in the previous chapter, and some scholars consider that the story of the raid and defeat of Zerah has no basis in fact. It is, however, more probable that it originates in a genuine tradition of the repulse of some Egyptian, or rather Arabian (see note, verse 9), inroad, not necessarily, however, in the time of Asa: compare the Introduction § 7, p. l.
⁹And there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an army of a thousand thousand, and three hundred chariots; and he came unto Mareshah.
9. against them] We should expect either against him (i.e. Asa) or against Judah. Perhaps this account has been torn out from some older document without regard to the context, so that the reference of them is lost. Compare notes on verses 12, 13, 14.
Zerah the Ethiopian] Rather, Zerah the Cushite (“man of Cush”). Cush (Genesis x. 7) was the ancestor of certain Arabian tribes, including Saba, see 1 Chronicles i. 9; and Arabians and Cushites (“Ethiopians” Authorized Version, also Revised Version) are mentioned as neighbours (2 Chronicles xxi. 16). It is therefore highly probable that the leader of the inroad was an Arabian (Sabean) and not an Ethiopian. (Compare S. A. Cook in Expository Times June, 1906, p. 541, against Petrie, History of Egypt.) Zerah perhaps represents Dhirrīh (Zirrīh), a title (meaning “the magnificent”) of several of the oldest princes of Saba. The tradition may therefore be brought into connection with the many indications in Chronicles of Arabian incursions on the southern borders of Judah. Mareshah, where the battle was fought (verse 9), was one of the ancient seats of the Calebites from which they were driven northwards (compare 1 Chronicles ii.). Those who prefer to regard Cushite as = Ethiopian—see 1 Chronicles i. 8—and Zerah as an Egyptian king, have to suppose that “Ethiopian” is applied to him loosely and somewhat ignorantly; and further, as no king of Egypt is so named, that Zerah must denote Osorkon I or II, or perhaps be the name of a general of Osorkon. From xvi. 8 (see the note on Lubim) it would seem probable that the Chronicler believed Zerah’s host to be an Egyptian force.
a thousand thousand] An inroad of the “children of the East” was formidable from sheer weight of numbers. We may gather from xvi. 8 that the original assailants were joined by other hordes as they drew near the border of Judah. The number a thousand thousand is probably meant to signify that the host was too great to number; it is, of course, not to be taken literally.
three hundred chariots] The chariots, though comparatively few, are mentioned, (1) perhaps because Asa himself had none, (2) perhaps also because they represent an Egyptian contingent. This suggestion receives support from xvi. 8, where the Lubim (compare xii. 3) are associated with the Cushites in the invasion. The cowardly foreign policy of Egypt may have led her on this occasion to defend her own borders from the barbarian hordes by encouraging them to invade her neighbour’s territories.
The reading three hundred is supported by the LXX. and is probably right. The reading of the Peshitṭa, “thirty thousand,” and the wording of xvi. 8, “with exceeding many chariots and horsemen,” seem like a retouching of the narrative to make the number of the chariots and horsemen correspond with the number of the whole host.
Mareshah] See note on xi. 8.
¹⁰Then Asa went out to meet him, and they set the battle in array in the valley of Zephathah at Mareshah. ¹¹And Asa cried unto the Lord his God, and said, Lord, there is none¹ beside² thee to help, between the mighty and him that hath no strength: help us, O Lord our God; for we rely on thee, and in thy name are we come against this multitude. O Lord, thou art our God; let not man prevail against thee.
10. in the valley] Probably the valley in which Beit-Jibrin now stands, one of several valleys giving access from the Shephelah into central Judah (G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, pp. 230–233). In such a place a large force might easily be discomfited by a few resolute men (compare 2 Samuel xvii. 9, 10).
of Zephathah at Mareshah] Render with LXX., north of Mareshah (reading Ṣaphonah for Zephathah). No valley or town called “Zephathah” is known.
¹²So the Lord smote the Ethiopians before Asa, and before Judah; and the Ethiopians fled.
12. the Lord smote] Compare xiii. 15. The use of The Name, Jehovah (translated The Lord), instead of the general word “God” here and in verses 13, 14 is in favour of the view that the Chronicler took this account from some earlier document, perhaps a midrashic history of Judah (Introduction § 5, p. xxxvi).
the Ethiopians] Rather, the Cushites.
¹³And Asa and the people that were with him pursued them unto Gerar: and there fell of the Ethiopians so many¹ that they could not recover themselves; for they were destroyed² before the Lord, and before his host; and they carried away very much booty.
13. Gerar] Identified with Jerār, ruins three hours south of Gaza; compare 1 Chronicles iv. 39 (read “Gerar,” LXX. Γέραρα),
so many that they could not recover themselves] Or perhaps, as margin, so that none remained alive.
very much booty] The phrase used belongs to a style earlier than that of the Chronicler. Compare note on verse 9 (against them).
¹⁴And they smote all the cities round about Gerar; for the fear of the Lord¹ came upon them: and they spoiled all the cities; for there was much spoil in them.
14. the fear of the Lord] The Chroniclers own phrase is “the fear of God” (xx. 29).
much spoil] Again we miss a favourite expression of the Chronicler: “exceeding (lārōbh) much spoil.”
¹⁵They smote also the tents of cattle, and carried away sheep in abundance and camels, and returned to Jerusalem.
15. the tents of cattle] These words are so strange an expression that it is probable the text is corrupt. If so, the original reading is unknown, for the LXX. has the same reading as the Hebrew It adds a proper name, evidently intended as the name of an Arabian tribe, but this addition appears to be a gloss derived from a reading of the LXX. in xxii. 1.