Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Kings 18:13
Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did Sennacherib king of Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them.
13 16. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, invades Judah. Hezekiah submits, and pays a large tribute (2Ch 32:1; Isa 36:1)
13. Sennacherib king of Assyria ] Sennacherib was the son of Sargon, but as it seems not the eldest, and only became heir to the throne in the year before his father’s death. He is said to have begun his reign b.c. 705 and to have been murdered in 681. The operations against Hezekiah seem to have been only part of a larger campaign, which appears to have been directed against those states which were in alliance with Egypt. For the Assyrian troops had gone beyond Jerusalem, and were at Lachish when Hezekiah sent in his submission. According to the inscriptions Sennacherib had overrun Phnicia and advanced along the coast to attack the cities of the Philistines. We can see from 2Ki 19:8-9 that the Egyptian power was advancing from the south, and eventually caused more pressure to be put on Jerusalem by the Assyrians that they might reduce it if possible, before aid arrived from Egypt. For we may be sure that Hezekiah in his attempt to shake himself free from Assyria had, like his neighbours, sought the friendship of the Egyptians.
all the fenced cities of Judah ] These were subjugated first, that there might be no chance of help from them if it became necessary to assault the capital. With some cities of the Philistines already in his hands, it would be easy for Sennacherib to overrun Juda and capture the less fortified places.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
In the fourteenth year – This note of time, which places the invasion of Sennacherib eight years only after the capture of Samaria, is hopelessly at variance with the Assyrian dates for the two events, the first of which falls into the first of Sargon, and the second into the fourth of Sennacherib, twenty-one years later. We have therefore to choose between an entire rejection of the Assyrian chronological data, and an emendation of the present passage. Of the emendations proposed the simplest is to remove the note of time altogether, regarding it as having crept in from the margin.
Sennacherib – This is the Greek form of the Sinakhirib of the inscriptions, the son of Sargon, and his immediate successor in the monarchy. The death of Sargon (705 B.C.) had been followed by a number of revolts. Hezekiah also rebelled, invaded Philistia, and helped the national party in that country to throw off the Assyrian yoke.
From Sennacheribs inscriptions we learn that, having reduced Phoenicia, recovered Ascalon, and defeated an army of Egyptians and Ethiopians at Ekron, he marched against Jerusalem.
The fenced cities – Sennacherib reckons the number taken by him at forty-six. He seems to have captured on his way to the holy city a vast number of small towns and villages, whose inhabitants he carried off to the number of 200, 000. Compare Isa 24:1-12. The ground occupied by his main host outside the modern Damascus gate was thenceforth known to the Jews as the camp of the Assyrians. Details connected with the siege may be gathered from Isa. 22 and Chronicles (marginal reference s). After a while Hezekiah resolved on submission. Sennacherib 2Ki 18:14 had left his army to continue the siege, and gone in person to Lachish. The Jewish monarch sent his embassy to that town.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Ki 18:13-16
Now in the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah.
The folly of defying God
As you stood some stormy day upon a sea-cliff, and marked the giant billow rise from the deep, to rush on with foaming crest, and throw itself thundering on the trembling shore, did you ever fancy that you could stay its course, and hurl it back to the depths of ocean! Did you ever stand beneath the laden, lowering cloud, and mark the lightnings leap, as it shot and flashed dazzling athwart the gloom, and think that you could grasp the bolt and change its path! Still more foolish and vain his thought who fancies that he can arrest or turn aside the purpose of God, saying: What is the Almighty that we should serve Him? Let us break His bands asunder, and cast away His cords from us! Break His bands asunder! How He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh! (Guthrie.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Sennacherib, the son or successor of Shalmaneser.
Come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them, i.e. against many of them; universal particles being frequently so used, both in Scripture and other authors; for that all were not taken appears from 2Ki 19:8. And his success God gave him, partly, to lift him up to his own greater and more shameful destruction; partly, to humble and chastise his own people for their manifold sins, and afterwards to raise them up with more comfort and glory; and partly, to gain an eminent opportunity to advance his own honour and service by that miraculous deliverance which he designed for his people.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
13. Sennacheribthe son andsuccessor of Shalmaneser.
all the fenced cities ofJudahnot absolutely all of them; for, besides the capital,some strong fortresses held out against the invader (2Ki 18:17;2Ki 19:8). The following accountof Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah and the remarkable destruction ofhis army, is repeated almost verbatim in 2Ch 32:1-33;Isa 36:1-37. The expeditionseems to have been directed against Egypt, the conquest of which waslong a leading object of ambition with the Assyrian monarchs. But theinvasion of Judah necessarily preceded, that country being the key toEgypt, the highway through which the conquerors from Upper Asia hadto pass. Judah had also at this time formed a league of mutualdefense with Egypt (2Ki 18:24).Moreover, it was now laid completely open by the transplantation ofIsrael to Assyria. Overrunning Palestine, Sennacherib laid siege tothe fortress of Lachish, which lay seven Roman miles fromEleutheropolis, and therefore southwest of Jerusalem on the way toEgypt [ROBINSON]. Amongthe interesting illustrations of sacred history furnished by therecent Assyrian excavations, is a series of bas-reliefs, representingthe siege of a town, which the inscription on the sculpture shows tobe Lachish, and the figure of a king, whose name is given, on thesame inscription, as Sennacherib. The legend, sculptured over thehead of the king, runs thus: “Sennacherib, the mighty king, kingof the country of Assyria, sitting on the throne of judgment beforethe city of Lachish [Lakhisha], I give permission for its slaughter”[Nineveh and Babylon]. This minute confirmation of the truthof the Bible narrative is given not only by the name Lachish, whichis contained in the inscription, but from the physiognomy of thecaptives brought before the king, which is unmistakably Jewish.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now in the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah,…. Eight years after the captivity of Israel:
did Sennacherib king of Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them; many of them, the frontier towns, and proceeded as far as Lachish; ambitious of enlarging his dominions, his father having subdued the kingdom of Israel, and being also provoked by Hezekiah’s refusing to pay him tribute. Mention is made of this king by name, by Herodotus and other Heathen writers, see the note on Isa 36:1 in the Apocryha:
“Now when Enemessar was dead, Sennacherib his son reigned in his stead; whose estate was troubled, that I could not go into Media.” (Tobit 1:15)
he is called Sennacherib, and is said to be son of Enemassat, that is, Shalmaneser; however, he succeeded him in his kingdom; though some o take him to be the same with Shalmaneser: he is said by Metasthenes p to reign seven years, and was succeeded by Assaradon, who, according to him, reigned ten years.
o Lud. Vives in Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. 18. c. 24. p De Judicio Temp. fol. 221. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Sennacherib invades Judah and threatens Jerusalem.
(Note: We have a parallel and elaborate account of this campaign of Sennacherib and his defeat (2 Kings 18:13-19:37), and also of Hezekiah ‘ s sickness and recovery and the arrival of the Babylonian embassy in Jerusalem (2 Kings 20:1-19), in Isa 36-39, and a brief extract, with certain not unimportant supplements, in 2 Chron 32. These three narratives, as is now generally admitted, are drawn independently of one another from a collection of the prophecies of Isaiah, which was received into the annals of the kingdom (2Ch 32:32), and serve to confirm and complete one another.)
– Sennacherib, ( Sancherbh ), (lxx), (Joseph.), (Herodot.), whose name has not yet been deciphered with certainty upon the Assyrian monuments or clearly explained (see J. Brandis uber den histor. Gewinn aus der Entzifferung der assyr. Inschriften, pp. 103ff., and M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, p. 37), was the successor of Salmanasar (Sargina according to the monuments). He is called by Herodotus (ii. 141), and reigned, according to Berosus, eighteen years. He took all the fortified cities in Judah ( , with the masculine suffix instead of the feminine: cf. Ewald, 184, c.). The , all, is not to be pressed; for, beside the strongly fortified capital Jerusalem, he had not yet taken the fortified cities of Lachish and Libnah (2Ki 18:17 and 2Ki 19:8) at the time, when, according to 2Ki 18:14., he sent a division of his army against Jerusalem, and summoned Hezekiah to surrender that city. According to Herodotus ( l.c.), the real object of his campaign was Egypt, which is also apparent from 2Ki 19:24, and is confirmed by Isa 10:24; for which reason Tirhaka marched against him (2Ki 19:8; cf. M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, pp. 171, 172).
2Ki 18:14-16 On the report of Sennacherib’s approach, Hezekiah made provision at once for the safety of Jerusalem. He had the city fortified more strongly, and the fountain of the upper Gihon and the brook near the city stopped up (see at 2Ki 18:17), to cut off the supply of water from the besiegers, as is stated in 2Ch 32:2-8, and confirmed by Isa 22:8-11. In the meantime Sennacherib had pressed forward to Lachish, i.e., Um Lakis, in the plain of Judah, on the south-west of Jerusalem, seven hours to the west of Eleutheropolis on the road to Egypt (see at Jos 10:3); so that Hezekiah, having doubts as to the possibility of a successful resistance, sent ambassadors to negotiate with him, and promised to pay him as much tribute as he might demand if he would withdraw. The confession “I have sinned” is not to be pressed, inasmuch as it was forced from Hezekiah by the pressure of distress. Since Asshur had made Judah tributary by faithless conduct on the part of Tiglath-pileser towards Ahaz, there was nothing really wrong in the shaking off of this yoke by the refusal to pay any further tribute. But Hezekiah certainly did wrong, when, after taking the first step, he was alarmed at the disastrous consequences, and sought to purchase once more the peace which he himself had broken, by a fresh submission and renewal of the payment of tribute. This false step on the part of the pious king, which arose from a temporary weakness of faith, was nevertheless turned into a blessing through the pride of Sennacherib and the covenant-faithfulness of the Lord towards him and his kingdom. Sennacherib demanded the enormous sum of three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold (more than two and a half million thalers, or 375,000); and Hezekiah not only gave him all the gold and silver found in the treasures of the temple and palace, but had the gold plates with which he had covered the doors and doorposts of the temple (2Ch 29:3) removed, to send them to the king of Assyria. , lit., the supports, i.e., the posts, of the doors.
These negotiations with Sennacherib on the part of Hezekiah are passed over both in the book of Isaiah and also in the Chronicles, because they had no further influence upon the future progress of the war.
2Ki 18:17 For though Sennacherib did indeed take the money, he did not depart, as he had no doubt promised, but, emboldened still further by this submissiveness, sent a detachment of his army against Jerusalem, and summoned Hezekiah to surrender the capital. “He sent Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh.” Rabshakeh only is mentioned in Isaiah, as the chief speaker in the negotiations which follow, although in Isa 37:6 and Isa 37:24 allusion is evidently made to the other two. Tartan had no doubt the chief command, since he is not only mentioned first here, but conducted the siege of Ashdod, according to Isa 20:1. The three names are probably only official names, or titles of the offices held by the persons mentioned. For means princeps eunuchorum , and chief cup-bearer. is explained by Hitzig on Isa 20:1 as derived from the Persian tr-tan, “high person or vertex of the body,” and in Jer 39:3 as “body-guard;” but this is hardly correct, as the other two titles are Semitic. These generals took up their station with their army “at the conduit of the upper pool, which ran by the road of the fuller’s field,” i.e., the conduit which flowed from the upper pool – according to 2Ch 32:30, the basin of the upper Gihon (Birket el Mamilla) – into the lower pool (Birket es Sultn: see at 1Ki 1:33). According to Isa 7:3, this conduit was in existence as early as the time of Ahaz. The “end” of it is probably the locality in which the conduit began at the upper pool or Gihon, or where it first issued from it. This conduit which led from the upper Gihon into the lower, and which is called in 2Ch 32:30 “the outflow of the upper Gihon,” Hezekiah stopped up, and conducted the water downwards, i.e., the underground, towards the west into the city of David; that is to say, he conducted the water of the upper Gihon, which had previously flowed along the western side of the city outside the wall into the lower Gihon and so away down the valley of Ben-hinnom, into the city itself by means of a subterranean channel,
(Note: We may get some idea of the works connected with this aqueduct from the description of the “ sealed fountain ” of the Solomon ‘ s pool at Ain Saleh in Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 857ff., Dritte Wanderung.)
that he might retain this water for the use of the city in the event of a siege of Jerusalem, and keep it from the besiegers.
This water was probably collected in the cistern ( ) which Hezekiah made, i.e., order to be constructed (2Ki 20:20), or the reservoir “between the two walls for the waters of the old pool,” mentioned in Isa 22:11, i.e., most probably the reservoir still existing at some distance to the east of the Joppa gate on the western side of the road which leads to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the so-called “pool of Hezekiah,” which the natives call Birket el Hamman, “Bathing-pool,” because it supplies a bath in the neighbourhood, or B. el Batrak, “Patriarch’s pool” (see Robinson, Pal. i. p. 487, and Fresh Researches into the Topography of Jerusalem, pp. 111ff.), since this is still fed by a conduit from the Mamilla pool (see E. G. Schultz, Jerusalem, p. 31, and Tobler, Denkbltter, pp. 44ff.).
(Note: The identity of the , which Hezekiah constructed as a reservoir for the overflow of the upper Gihon that was conducted into the city (2Ki 20:20), with the present “ pool of Hezekiah ” is indeed very probable, but not quite certain. For in very recent times, on digging the foundation for the Evangelical church built on the northern slope of Zion, they lighted upon a large well-preserved arched channel, which was partly cut in the rock, and, where this was not the case, built in level layers and coated within with a hard cement about an inch thick and covered with large stones (Robinson, New Inquiries as to the Topography of Jerusalem, p. 113, and Bibl. Res. p. 318), and which might possibly be connected with the channel made by Hezekiah to conduct the water of the upper Gihon into the city, although this channel does not open into the pool of Hezekiah, and the walls, some remains of which are still preserved, may belong to a later age. The arguments adduced by Thenius in support of the assumption that the “ lower ” or “ old pool ” mentioned in Isa 22:9 and Isa 22:11 is different from the lower Gihon-pool, and to be sought for in the Tyropoeon, are inconclusive. It by no means follows from the expression, “ which lies by the road of the fuller ‘ s field, ” i.e., by the road which runs past the fuller ‘ s field, that there was another upper pool in Jerusalem beside the upper pool (Gihon); but this additional clause simply serves to define more precisely the spot by the conduit mentioned where the Assyrian army took its stand; and it by no means follows from the words of Isa 22:11, “ a gathering of waters have ye made between the two walls for the waters of the old pool, ” that this gathering of waters was made in the Tyropoeon, and that this “ old pool, ” as distinguished from the lower pool (Isa 22:9), was an upper pool, which was above the king ‘ s pool mentioned in Neh 3:15. For even if occurs in 2Ki 25:4; Jer 39:4; Jer 52:7, in connection with a locality on the south-east side of the city, the Old Testament says nothing about two pools in the Tyropoeon at the south-east corner of Jerusalem, but simply mentions a fountain gate, which probably derived its name from the present fountain of the Virgin, and the king ‘ s pool, also called Shelach in Neh 2:14; Neh 3:15, which was no doubt fed from that fountain like the present Siloam, and watered the royal gardens. (Compare Rob. Pal. i. pp. 565ff., and Bibl. Res. p. 189, and Tobler, Die Siloah-quelle u. der Oelberg, pp. 1ff.). The two walls, between which Hezekiah placed the reservoir, may very well be the northern wall of Zion and the one which surrounded the lower city (Acra) on the north-west, according to which the words in Isa 22:11 would admirably suit the “ pool of Hezekiah. ” Again, Hezekiah did not wait till the departure of Sennacherib before he built this conduit, which is also mentioned in Wis. 48:17, as Knobel supposes (on Isa 22:11), but he made it when he first invaded Judah, before the appearance of the Assyrian troops in front of Jerusalem, when he made the defensive preparations noticed at v. 14, as is evident from 2Ch 32:3-4, compared with 2Ki 18:30, since the stopping up of the fountain outside the city, to withdraw the water from the Assyrians, is expressly mentioned in 2Ki 18:3, 2Ki 18:4 among the measures of defence; and in the concluding notices concerning Hezekiah in 2Ki 20:20, and 2Ch 32:30, there is also a brief allusion to this work, without any precise indication of the time when he had executed it.)
2Ki 18:18 Hezekiah considered it beneath his dignity to negotiate personally with the generals of Sennacherib. He sent three of his leading ministers out to the front of the city: Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, the captain of the castle, who had only received the appointment to this office a short time before in Shebna’s place (Isa 22:20-21); Shebna, who was still secretary of state ( : see at 2Sa 8:17); and Joach the son of Asaph, the chancellor ( : see at 2Sa 8:16).
Rabshakeh made a speech to these three (2Ki 18:19-25), in which he tried to show that Hezekiah’s confidence that he would be able to resist the might of the king of Assyria was perfectly vain, since neither Egypt (2Ki 18:21), nor his God (2Ki 18:22), nor his forces (2Ki 18:23), would be able to defend him.
2Ki 18:19 “The great king:” the Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian kings all assumed this title (cf. Eze 26:7; Dan 2:37), because kings of conquered lands were subject to them as vassals (see at Isa 10:8). “What is this confidence that thou cherishest?” i.e., how vain or worthless is this confidence!
2Ki 18:20 “Thou sayest … it is only a lip-word…: counsel and might for battle;” i.e., if thou speakest of counsel and might for battle, that is only , a word that merely comes from the lips, not from the heart, the seat of the understanding, i.e., a foolish and inconsiderate saying (cf. Pro 14:23; Job 11:2). – is to be preferred to the of Isaiah as the more original of the two. , now, sc. we will see on whom thou didst rely, when thou didst rebel against me.
2Ki 18:21 On Egypt? “that broken reed, which runs into the hand of any one who would lean upon it (thinking it whole), and pierces it through.” This figure, which is repeated in Eze 29:6-7, is so far suitably chosen, that the Nile, representing Egypt, is rich in reeds. What Rabshakeh says of Egypt here, Isaiah had already earnestly impressed upon his people (Isa 30:3-5), to warn them against trusting in the support of Egypt, from which one party in the nation expected help against Assyria.
2Ki 18:22 Hezekiah (and Judah) had a stronger ground of confidence in Jehovah his God. Even this Rabshakeh tried to shake, availing himself very skilfully, from his heathen point of view, of the reform which Hezekiah had made in the worship, and representing the abolition of the altars on the high places as an infringement upon the reverence that ought to be shown to God. “And if ye say, We trust in Jehovah our God, (I say:) is it not He whose high places and altars Hezekiah has taken away and has said to Judah and Jerusalem, Ye shall worship before this altar (in the temple) in Jerusalem?” Instead of , according to which Rabshakeh turned to the deputies, we have in Isa 7:7 , according to which the words are addressed to Hezekiah, as in 2Ki 18:20. is preferred by Thenius, Knobel, and others, because in what follows Hezekiah is addressed in the third person. but the very circumstance that is apparently more suitable favours the originality of , according to which the king is still addressed in the person of his ambassadors, and Rabshakeh only speaks directly to the ambassadors when this argument is answered. The attack upon the confidence which the Judaeans placed in their God commences with . The opinion of Thenius, that the second clause of the verse is a continuation of the words supposed to be spoken by the Judaeans who trusted in God, and that the apodosis does not follow till 2Ki 18:23, is quite a mistake. The ambassadors of Hezekiah could not regard the high places and idolatrous altars that had been abolished as altars of Jehovah; and the apodosis could not commence with .
2Ki 18:23-24 Still less could Hezekiah rely upon his military resources. : enter, I pray thee, (into contest) with my lord, and I will give thee 2000 horses, if thou canst set the horsemen upon them. The meaning, of course, is not that Hezekiah could not raise 2000 soldiers in all, but that he could not produce so many men who were able to fight as horsemen. “How then wilt thou turn back a single one of the smallest lieutenants of my lord?” , to repulse a person’s face, means generally to turn away a person with his petition (1Ki 2:16-17), here to repulse an assailant. is one pasha; although hguo , which is grammatically subordinate to , is in the construct state, that the genitives which follow may be connected (for this subordination of see Ewald, 286, a.). (see at 1Ki 10:15), lit., under-vicegerent, i.e., administrator of a province under a satrap, in military states also a subordinate officer. : and so (with thy military force so small) thou trustest in Egypt , so far as war-chariots and horsemen are concerned.
2Ki 18:25 After Rabshakeh had thus, as he imagined, taken away every ground of confidence from Hezekiah, he added still further, that the Assyrian king himself had also not come without Jehovah, but had been summoned by Him to effect the destruction of Judah. It is possible that some report may have reached his ears of the predictions of the prophets, who had represented the Assyrian invasion as a judgment from the Lord, and these he used for his own purposes. Instead of , against this place, i.e., Jerusalem, we have in Isaiah, – a reading which owes its origin simply to the endeavour to bring the two clauses into exact conformity to one another.
2Ki 18:26-37 It was very conceivable that Rabshakeh’s boasting might make an impression upon the people; the ambassadors of Hezekiah therefore interrupted him with the request that he would speak to them in Aramaean, as they understood that language, and not in Jewish, on account of the people who were standing upon the wall. was the language spoken in Syria, Babylonia, and probably also in the province of Assyria, and may possibly have been Rabshakeh’s mother-tongue, even if the court language of the Assyrian kings was an Aryan dialect. With the close affinity between the Aramaean and the Hebrew, the latter could not be unknown to Rabshakeh, so that he made use of it, just as the Aramaean language was intelligible to the ministers of Hezekiah, whereas the people in Jerusalem understood only , Jewish, i.e., the Hebrew language spoken in the kingdom of Judah. It is evident from the last clause of the verse that the negotiations were carried on in the neighbourhood of the city wall of Jerusalem.
2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh rejected this proposal with the scornful remark, that his commission was not to speak to Hezekiah and his ambassadors only, but rather to the people upon the wall. The variation of the preposition and in , to thy lord (Hezekiah), and , to thee (Eliakim as chief speaker), is avoided in the text of Isaiah. is frequently used for , in the later usage of the language, in the sense of to or at. In the words “who sit upon the wall to eat their dung and drink their urine,” Rabshakeh points to the horrors which a siege of Jerusalem would entail upon the inhabitants. For = , excrementa sua , and , urinas suas , the Masoretes have substituted the euphemisms , going forth, and , water of their feet.
2Ki 18:28-30 : not, he stood up, raised himself (Ges.), or came forward (Then.), but he stationed himself, assumed an attitude calculated for effect, and spoke to the people with a loud voice in the Jewish language, telling them to listen to the king of Assyria and not to be led astray by Hezekiah, i.e., to be persuaded to defend the city any longer, since neither Hezekiah nor Jehovah could defend them from the might of Sennacherib. : let not Hezekiah deceive you, sc. by pretending to be able to defend or save Jerusalem. In , “out of his (the Assyrian’s) hand,” the speaker ceases to speak in the name of his king. On the construction of the passive with , see Ewald, 277, d., although in the instance before us he proposes to expunge the after Isa 36:15.
2Ki 18:31-32 “Make peace with me and come out to me (sc., out of your walls, i.e., surrender to me), and ye shall eat every one his vine, … till I come and bring you into a land like your own land…” is used here to signify peace as the concentration of weal and blessing. The imperative expresses the consequence of what goes before (vid., Ewald, 347, b.). To eat his vine and fig-tree and to drink the water of his well is a figure denoting the quiet and undisturbed enjoyment of the fruits of his own possession (cf. 1Ki 5:5). Even in the event of their yielding, the Assyrian would transport the Jewish people into another land, according to the standing custom of Asiatic conquerors in ancient times (for proofs see Hengstenberg, De rebus Tyriis, pp. 51, 52). To make the people contented with this thought, the boaster promised that the king of Assyria would carry them into a land which was quite as fruitful and glorious as the land of Canaan. The description of it as a land with corn and new wine, etc., recalls the picture of the land of Canaan in Deu 8:8 and Deu 33:28. is the olive-tree which yields good oil, in distinction from the wild olive-tree. : and ye shall live and not die, i.e., no harm shall befall you from me (Thenius). This passage is abridged in Isa 36:17.
2Ki 18:33-34 Even Jehovah could not deliver them any more than Hezekiah. As a proof of this, Rabshakeh enumerated a number of cities and lands which the king of Assyria had conquered, without their gods’ being able to offer any resistance to his power. “Where are the gods of Hamath, etc., that they might have delivered Samaria out of my hand?” Instead of we have and that they might have, which loosens the connection somewhat more between this clause and the preceding one, and makes it more independent. “Where are they?” is equivalent to they are gone, have perished (cf. 2Ki 19:18); and “that they might have delivered” is equivalent to they have not delivered. The subject to is , which includes the God of Samaria. Sennacherib regards himself as being as it were one with his predecessors, as the representative of the might of Assyria, so that he attributes to himself the conquests of cities and lands which his ancestors had made. The cities and lands enumerated in 2Ki 18:34 have been mentioned already in 2Ki 17:24 as conquered territories, from which colonists had been transplanted to Samaria, with the exception of Arpad and Hena. , which is also mentioned in 2Ki 19:13; Isa 10:9; Isa 36:19; Isa 37:13, and Jer 49:23, in connection with Hamath, was certainly situated in the neighbourhood of that city, and still exists, so far as the name is concerned, in the large village of rfd, Arfd (mentioned by Maraszid, i. 47), in northern Syria in the district of Azz, which was seven hours to the north of Haleb, according to Abulf. Tab. Syr. ed. Khler, p. 23, and Niebuhr, Reise, ii. p. 414 (see Roediger, Addenda ad Ges. thes. p. 112). , Hena, which is also combined with ‘Ivvah in 2Ki 19:13 and Isa 37:13, is probably the city of ‘nt Ana, on the Euphrates, mentioned by Abulf., and is most likely the same as in 2Ki 17:24. The names are omitted from the text of Isaiah in consequence of the abridgment of Rabshakeh’s address.
2Ki 18:35 2Ki 18:35 contains the conclusion drawn from the facts already adduced: “which of all the gods of the lands are they who have delivered their land out of my hand, that Jehovah should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand?” i.e., as not one of the gods of the lands named have been able to rescue his land from Assyria, Jehovah also will not be able to defend Jerusalem.
2Ki 18:36-37 The people were quite silent at this address (“the people,” , to whom Rabshakeh had wished to address himself); for Hezekiah had forbidden them to make any answer, not only to prevent Rabshakeh from saying anything further, but that the ambassadors of Sennacherib might be left in complete uncertainty as to the impression made by their words. The deputies of Hezekiah returned to the king with their clothes rent as a sign of grief at the words of the Assyrian, by which not only Hezekiah, but still more Jehovah, had been blasphemed, and reported what they had heard.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.
2Ki. 18:13. In the fourteenth year of Hezekiah did Sennacherib, &c.Comp. Isaiah 36. This mighty Assyrian was with his vast army on his way to war with his hated and dreaded rival, Egypt. Judah lay in the line of his march, and its conquest was essential to his safe advance to Egypt. Hezekiah trembled as this terrible foe swept down upon the land; and being without support from Egypt, he purchased temporary respite by a heavy tribute valuing 351,000, to raise which he had to empty the palace, and even strip the gold from the temple (2Ki. 18:16).
2Ki. 18:14. The king of Assyria to LachishA strongly fortified town south-west of Jerusalem on the way to Egypt. One of the Assyrian bas-reliefs recently discovered represents the seige of a town; shows the figure of an Assyrian king conducting it, and a string of captives whose physiognomy is unmistakably Jewish. Over the head of the king runs this inscription: Sennacherib, the mighty king, king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the throns of judgment before the city of Lachish: I give permission for its slaughter.
2Ki. 18:17. Tartan and Rabsaris against JerusalemSennacherib himself marched forward against Egypt, where he found himself engaged in a three years campaign, ending in defeat. Tartan was general; Rabsaris, chief of the eunuchs; Rab-shakeh, chief cup-bearer. The generals insolent message to Hezekiah was met with the silence (2Ki. 18:36) which the king had imposed on his delegates (2Ki. 18:18). and which the people also maintained. This avoided provocation to the Assyrian general. The am bassadors, grieved at the menacing and insulting language to their king, and the blasphemies against Jehovah to which they had listened, returned to Hezekiah covered with the signs of humiliation and mourning.W. H. J.
HOMILETICS OF 2Ki. 18:13-37
A BOASTFUL AND ARROGANT SPIRIT
I. Is the offspring of military success (2Ki. 18:13-16). The Assyrian king invaded Judah, captured the fenced cities, compelled Hezekiah to pay a heavy tribute, and now his victorious legions surrounded Jerusalem and threatened it with immediate destruction. Flushed with success and with unlimited confidence in the power of their arms, the captains of the great king indulge in a spirit of proud vaunting. It is the tendency of all military successespecially as war was carried on in those daysto inspire an arrogant and self-confident spirit. Few men know how to behave themselves in the moment of victory. Some soldiers are so elated with triumph, that their bounce and vanity are intolerable. It is forgotten that, in the changing fortunes of warfare, the winners of the fight to-day may be the vanquished of to-morrow.
II. Is plausible in speech and lavish in promises (2Ki. 18:17-32). There is a sort of cleverness in this speech of Rabshakehsthe cleverness of craft and guile and flattery. He rallies Hezekiah on his trust in Egypt and in Jehovah, as though they were one and the same in the Assyrian estimation. He promises 2,000 horses if the Jews will come out and fight, though by their inability to find a sufficient number of horsemen he thus shows off the superiority of his attacking forces. He claims to have the authority of Jehovah for his enterprise, and, turning to the people who crowded the city walls, he entices them to submission by promises of peace and plenty. A boastful and arrogant spirit has endless inflexibility; it can adapt itself to anything to gain a purpose. It can hide the most sinister designs under a mask of bewitching plausibility, like certain birds which imitate in their attitudes the forms of the grasses and flowers where they watch for their prey.
III. Hesitates not to insult and defy the only true God (2Ki. 18:33-35). Rabshakeh boasts that none of the gods of the vanquished nations have been able to deliver their worshippers from the invincible power of the Assyrian arms; and in insulting and defiant terms he charges Jehovah with similar helplessness. But ah! Rabshakeh, thou dost not know the God of the Jews, or thou wouldst not so speak. Thou art carried away with the bombast of pride; and thy mind shaded with the dark screen of idolatrous ideas, thou canst not conceive the superlative greatness and grandeur of Jehovah. Ere long thou shalt be startled with His presence and awed with the ghastly evidences of His desolating power.
IV. Is best treated with dignified silence (2Ki. 18:36). Silence is what a proud man least can bear. It irritates and annoys him. He does not know whether you are laughing at him or are afraid of him. And yet what better answer than silence can we give to the threats and coaxings of the arrogant? Euripides was wont to say silence was an answer to a wise man; but we seem to have greater occasion for it in our dealing with fools and unreasonable persons; for men of breeding and sense will be satisfied with reason and fair words.
LESSONS:
1. Few men can bear with becoming modesty and dignity the power which success brings.
2. The flatteries and promises of a boastful man are unworthy of credence.
3. Neither threats nor flatteries should seduce us from our trust in Jehovah.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
2Ki. 18:13-16. Submission.
1. Distasteful to a liberty-loving king.
2. Inevitable in the face of superior force.
3. May prevent or postpone more serious consequences.
4. Often a heavy drain on national resources.
The gold of faith can only be made to appear through the fires of adversity. If thy faith is not a mere notion, or opinion, or feeling, or sensation, then it will not diminish in time of trial, but grow and become stronger and purer. Whence should we have had Davids Psalms, if he had not been tried?
2Ki. 18:14-16. Hezekiah held it good policy to make his enemy a golden bridge to go over: so to be rid of him. If Ahaz, that church-robber, had done this, it would better have become him. Hezekiah, for doing it, lost his cost (2Ki. 18:17).Trapp.
2Ki. 18:17-37. Diplomatic rhetoric.
1. Is a dangerous weapon in the hands of an unscrupulous orator.
2. Is often a specious mixture of truth and falsehood.
3. Seeks to weaken allegiance by flattering promises.
4. Awakens grave anxiety with its tone of confidence and power.
5. Sometimes best answered with dignified silence.
2Ki. 18:17-35. Rabshakeh, the wolf in sheeps clothing.I. He appears to warn against Egypt as a power which neither can nor will help, just as Isaiah himself does, while he himself comes to destroy and devour (Mat. 7:15; Matthew 1Jn. 4:1). II. He represents what had been ordained by Hezekiah, according to the law of the Lord and for His honour, as a sin and a breach of religion, while he himself cared nothing whatever for the law of the Lord or the true and right worship. Beware of those who represent as weakness and folly that which is Divine wisdom and strength. III. He claims that the Lord is with him, and has commanded to do what he is doing, whereas, in fact, he is only the rod of Gods wrath, the staff of His anger, a hired razor; and ambition, lust for gold and land, desire for glory and plunder, are his only motives (Mat. 7:22). Be not deceived by the prosperity and the victory of the godless. They are like chaff which the wind scatters, and their way disappears.Lange.
2Ki. 18:17. O lamentable and in sight desperate condition of distressed Jerusalem! Wealth it had none; strength it had but a little; all the country around about was subdued to the Assyrian; that proud victor has begirt the walls of it with an innumerable army, scorning that such a shovelful of earth should stand out but one day. Poor Jerusalem stands alone, blocked up with a world of enemies, helpless, friendless, comfortless, looking for the worst of a hostile fury, when Tartan and Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh, the great captains of the Assyrians, call to a parley. Lord! what insolent blasphemies does that foul mouth of Rabshakeh belch out against the living God, against His anointed servant!Bp. Hall.
We can never rely upon the fidelity of a man who is simply bought with money. Want of courage in ones self invites an enemy to arrogance. The more humbly one approaches an enemy, the more insolent he becomes. Peace and quiet which are bought with money have no duration.Lange.
2Ki. 18:21. A false friend compared to the reed of an Egyptian bulrush.
1. Because though it appears outwardly strong, it is brittle and hollow.
2. Because it fails when we most depend upon it.
3. Because it injures us when we expected it would help us.
2Ki. 18:30. The Lord will deliver us. I. A noble saying in the mouth of a king speaking to his people. He thereby admits that his own power is insufficient and vain. He leads his people in that faith which is a confidence in what is hoped for, and which admits no doubt of what is not seen. How well it would be for all princes, and people if they had such faith. II. In this saying, all the hope of the Christian life is expressed. With God we overcome the world, for the Lord will at length deliver us from all evil, and bring us to His heavenly kingdom. The blasphemer and boaster wanted to remove these words of the king from the heart of the people, because he knew he should then have won. Now-a-days, also, these words are laughed at and scorned. Let them not be torn from your heart!Lange.
2Ki. 18:36. Silence.
1. Is the wisest answer to provocation and threatening.
2. Increases the perplexity of a proud and cruel aggressor.
3. Implies confidence in the help which has been so grossly maligned.
They punished him with silence, as Isaac did Ishmael. Silence is the best answer to words of scorn and petulency. It is best to stop an open mouth with saying nothing. Princes used to punish the indecencies of ambassadors by denying them audience. Rabshakeh could not be more spited than with no answer. This sulphurous flask therefore died in his own smoke, only leaving a hateful stench behind it.Trapp.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
II. A POLITICAL CRISIS: THE ASSYRIAN INVASION OF 701 B.C. 18:13-19:37
In 701 B.C. the Assyrian king Sennacherib was able to turn his attention to the rebellious vassal in Jerusalem. It is not easy to correlate all the details of this section with Sennacheribs own account of the campaign. Some scholars feel that in 2Ki. 18:13 to 2Ki. 19:37 two Assyrian attacks against Jerusalem have been combined without the slightest indication of the time interval of some twenty years between them.[601] However, it is probably best to follow those scholars who assign all the data here given to the 701 B.C. invasion. The author first describes how Hezekiah met the tribute demands of Sennacherib (2Ki. 18:13-16). Next he narrates in some detail how the Assyrian made two efforts to force Hezekiah to surrender (2Ki. 18:17 to 2Ki. 19:7 and 2Ki. 19:8-34). He then relates how God delivered His people from the might of the powerful Sennacherib (2Ki. 19:35-37).
[601] Bright HI, pp. 269ff.
A. HEZEKIAHS TRIBUTARY PAYMENT TO SENNACHERIB 18:1316
TRANSLATION
(13) In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah, Sennacherib king of Assyria went up against all the fortified cities of Judah, and seized them. (14) And Hezekiah king of Judah sent unto the king of Assyria to Lachish, saying, I have offended; turn from me, that which you require of me I will bear. And the king of Assyria set upon Hezekiah king of Judah three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold. (15) And Hezekiah gave to him all the silver which was found in the house of the LORD and in the treasuries of the king. (16) At that time Hezekiah stripped the doors of the Temple of the LORD and the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah had overlaid, and gave them to the king of Assyria.
COMMENTS
In the fourteenth year of Hezekiahs independent reign (i.e., 701 B.C.) he came under attack by the mighty Assyrian king Sennacherib. On the famous Taylor Prism,[602] the Assyrian royal scribes recount the details of this campaign. The Great King first smashed Tyre, one of the leading cities involved in this western rebellion. Most of the confederates then capitulated, but Ashkelon, Ekron and Judah refused to submit. Sennacherib subdued these plains cities and an Egyptian relief column which attempted to come to their aid. He then apparently launched an attack against the southern Judaean city of Lachish,[603] a city which at this time was actually larger than Jerusalem.
[602] For a translation of this inscription see DOTT, p. 66f. or ANET, p. 287f.
[603] The Assyrian account of this invasion does not specifically mention the siege of Lachish, but wall reliefs depicting the conquest of Lachish were discovered in Sennacheribs fabulous palace-temple at Nineveh.
With his outlying fortified cities under Assyrian control, Hezekiah decided that it was pointless to continue the rebellion. He acknowledged his transgression in rebelling against his overlord, and entreated Sennacherib to withdraw his forces. Whatever penalty the Great King chose to impose upon him, Hezekiah was willing to bear. Sennacherib pretended to be willing to accept Hezekiahs offer of surrender, and imposed upon his rebellious vassal the enormous tribute of three hundred talents of silver ($600,000 BV) and thirty talents of gold ($900,000 BV; 2Ki. 18:14).[604] According to the Assyrian records, Hezekiah was also compelled to (1) make certain territorial concessions; (2) surrender an Assyrian vassal king who was being detained in Jerusalem; and (3) send two or more of his daughters to Nineveh to become part of Sennacheribs harem.
[604] Sennacherib states that he imposed on Hezekiah a tribute of thirty talents of gold and eight hundred talents of silver. Gray (OTL, p. 674) suggests that the three hundred talents mentioned in the Bible was the amount available in stamped ingots, and the extra talents mentioned in the Assyrian inscription is that obtained from other sources, such as the despoliation of the Temple.
In order to meet the tribute demands of Sennacherib, Hezekiah emptied treasuries of both the Temple and the palace (2Ki. 18:15). Only some thirty years before (cf. 2Ki. 16:8) Ahaz had emptied these same treasuries in order to hire the services of Tiglath-pileser. Apparently Hezekiah had little or no gold readily available and so he was forced to strip the gold from the pillars and doors which he himself had overlaid with the precious metal (2Ki. 18:16). Sennacherib relates that in addition to the two large sums of gold and silver, Hezekiah sent to him at this time woven cloth, scarlet, embroidered; precious stones or large size; skins of buffaloes; horns of buffaloes; and two kinds of woods.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(13-37) THE INVASION OF SENNACHERIB.
(13) In the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah.The fall of Samaria is dated 722-721 B.C. , both by the Bible and by the Assyrian inscriptions. That year was the sixth of Hezekiah, according to 2Ki. 18:10. His fourteenth year, therefore, would be 714-713 B.C. Sennacheribs own monuments, however, fix the date of the expedition against Judah and Egypt at 701 B.C. (See the careful discussion in Schraders Keilinschriften, pp. 313-317.) This divergence is remarkable, and must not be explained away. It must be borne in mind that the Assyrian documents are strictly contemporary, whereas the Books of Kings were compiled long after the events they record, and have only reached us after innumerable transcriptions; while the former, so far as they are unbroken, are in exactly the same state now as when they first left the hands of the Assyrian scribes.
Sennacherib.Called in his own annals Sin-ah-erib, or Sin-ah-erba, i.e., Sin (the moon-god) multiplied brothers. He was son and successor of Sargon, and reigned from 705-681 B.C. He invaded Judah in his third campaign.
All the fenced cities . . . took them.See Sennacheribs own words, quoted in the Note on 2Ch. 32:1.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
SENNACHERIB’S INVASION OF JUDAH, 2Ki 18:13-16.
Of Hezekiah’s reign, as recorded from this point on through chap. 20, we have a parallel history in Isaiah 36-39, which on the whole agrees so closely with this history in Kings as to necessitate the conclusion that both narratives had one and the same author. Which is the original copy, or whether both narratives as we now have them were drawn from a source older than either, are questions which have been variously answered by the critics and interpreters. Some have held that this account in Kings is the original one, and that of Isaiah is taken from it, whilst others have maintained precisely the reverse opinion. But against both these views stands the fact that each narrative contains matter not found in the other. Not to speak of numerous verbal differences, it will be observed that the account of Sennacherib’s first invasion, and Hezekiah’s submission and payment of tribute, (2Ki 18:14-16,) is altogether wanting in Isaiah, and Isaiah’s hymn of thanksgiving (Isa 38:9-20) is wanting in Kings. It follows, therefore, either that both accounts have been taken from some older history no longer extant, or else that both were composed by one and the same author, who made verbal changes, and added or omitted certain things in each narrative according to his own judgment and the design of the work to which each belonged. Beyond this it is impossible now to make any positive decision.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
13. The fourteenth year According to Rawlinson, this date is irreconcilable with the Assyrian inscriptions, and he proposes to read twenty-seventh for fourteenth.
Sennacherib The son and successor of Sargon. “The long notices which we possess of this monarch in the books of the Old Testament, his intimate connexion with the Jews, the fact that he was the object of a preternatural exhibition of the Divine displeasure, and the remarkable circumstance that this miraculous interposition appears under a thin disguise in the records of the Greeks, have always attached an interest to his name which the kings of this remote period and distant region very rarely awaken. It has also happened that the recent Mesopotamian researches have tended to give to Sennacherib a special prominence over other Assyrian monarchs, more particularly in this country, [England,] our great excavator [Layard] having devoted his chief efforts to the disinterment of a palace of this great king’s construction, which has supplied to our National Collection almost one half of its treasures. The result is, that while the other sovereigns who bore sway in Assyria are generally wholly unknown, or float before the mind’s eye as dim and shadowy forms, Sennacherib stands out to our apprehension as a living and breathing man, the impersonation of all that pride and greatness which we assign to the Ninevite kings, the living embodiment of Assyrian haughtiness, Assyrian violence, and Assyrian power.” RAWLINSON, Ancient Monarchies, vol. ii, p. 155.
All the fenced cities The fortified towns, forty-six in number according to the inscriptions. See below.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Invasion Of Judah By Sennacherib Results In Hezekiah Yielding And Being Called On To Face Major Penalties, Only For Sennacherib To Do An About Face And Decide To Take Jerusalem After All ( 2Ki 18:13-17 ).
Tyre, Ashkelon and Gaza having been defeated, and the remaining members of the alliance having submitted, Hezekiah was left on his own to face the full force of Assyria’s frontal attack. One by one Sennacherib began to besiege and take Judah’s fortified cities, with their surrounding towns and villages, transporting huge numbers of their inhabitants in the process, together with their treasured possessions, and then he laid siege to Lachish, Judah’s second city. Recognising the futility of resistance Hezekiah sued for terms. The terms were severe. He was to pay three hundred talent’s weight of silver, and thirty talent’s weight of gold. Furthermore the Assyrian record lays out much more (see above), including the handing over of Padi, the pro-Assyrian king of Ekron who was being held captive in Jerusalem.
The penalty was huge, and Hezekiah had to empty both the Temple treasury and the palace treasury, and to strip the Temple of its gold, in order to meet it. It may in fact be that that was insufficient for Sennacherib with the result that he decided to collect more, for having seemingly accepted the treaty he then reneged on it, which could be explained if the tribute fell short of requirements. Alternatively it may be that when Hezekiah’s servants arrived with the tribute Sennacherib decided that he wanted not only the tribute as brought by Hezekiah’s officials but Hezekiah’s own personal submission as an act of open contrition (and deliberate humiliation), something that Hezekiah was not prepared to do, possibly fearing the consequences (consider what had happened to Hoshea – 2Ki 17:4-5) or it may be that he then heard that a large Egyptian force might shortly be on its way which would include Judean mercenaries, and gathered from that fact that Hezekiah was possibly double-dealing.
Whichever way it was Sennacherib, reneging on his treaty, sent an advance force to Jerusalem in order to besiege it, close if off from outside contact, and starve it into submission. All appeared to be over for Jerusalem.
Analysis.
a
b And Hezekiah king of Judah sent to the king of Assyria to Lachish, saying, “I have offended, return from me. What you put on me I will bear.” And the king of Assyria appointed to Hezekiah king of Judah three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold (2Ki 18:14).
c And Hezekiah gave all the silver that was found in the house of YHWH, and in the treasures of the king’s house (2Ki 18:15).
b At that time Hezekiah cut off the gold from the doors of the temple of YHWH, and from the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah had overlaid, and gave it to the king of Assyria (2Ki 18:16).
a And the king of Assyria sent Tartan and Rab-saris and Rabshakeh from Lachish to king Hezekiah with a great army to Jerusalem (2Ki 18:17 a).
Note that in ‘a’ Sennacherib of Assyria took many of the fortified cities of Judah, and in the parallel he besieged the most important one of all. In ‘b’ he required from Hezekiah thirty talent’s weight of gold, and in the parallel Hezekiah stripped the Temple of its gold-plating in order to try to meet the demand. Centrally in ‘c’ all the silver in the treasuries of Judah were handed overt to Sennacherib.
2Ki 18:13
‘Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah Sennacherib king of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities of Judah, and took them.’
This was the fourteenth year of Hezekiah’s sole reign, and in that year Sennacherib invaded Judah with his full force. In his own words, ‘forty six of his strong-walled towns and innumerable smaller villages in their neighbourhood I besieged and took’. Things looked decidedly grim for Judah.
2Ki 18:14
‘And Hezekiah king of Judah sent to the king of Assyria to Lachish, saying, “I have offended, return from me. What you put on me I will bear.” And the king of Assyria appointed to Hezekiah king of Judah three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold.’
King Hezekiah recognised that the game was up and that the best thing that he could do was sue for the best terms he could obtain. So he sent messengers to Lachish, saying, “I have offended, return from me. What you put on me I will bear.” In other words he was admitting his fault as a rebellious vassal and asking him to withdraw his troops in return for whatever fine Sennacherib decided to exact. The reply that the messengers brought back was that he must pay three hundred talent’s weight of silver, and thirty talent’s weight of gold. This was, of course, on top of all the spoil that Sennacherib’s army had seized, ‘innumerable horses, mules, donkeys, camels and large and small cattle’. Other tribute, which was to follow later to Nineveh, was to include Hezekiah’s daughters as concubines, and some male and female musicians. And on top of this a large number of people were taken into exile. The number mentioned is an unusual one (200,150) suggesting that it was not intended to be taken literally (Possibly it signifies two hundred important families and one hundred and fifty notables). Large numbers were regularly used at the time in order to give an impression, rather than as being intended to be taken literally.
Sennacherib’s account cited eight hundred talents of silver, but that may have been typical Assyrian exaggeration in order to magnify his own importance, especially as he had raced back to Assyria without subduing Jerusalem, or it may have been due to the use of the Assyrian light talent in the reckoning, instead of the Judaean one, or it may have been that Sennacherib included in his assessment not only the official three hundred talents weight of stamped ingots, but other silver obtained in one way or another. Alternatively it may be that at some stage Sennacherib upped the price, at least in his own mind, in order to give the impression that his invasion had been greatly profitable. (In view of what happened at Jerusalem he may well never have received all that he asked for and may have been nursing a wounded ego. Inscriptions were after all for propaganda purposes, not in order to tell the literal truth. Few kings ever recorded a defeat). Temple and palace treasures were very carefully assessed and recorded so that the Biblical figures can be relied on.
2Ki 18:15
‘And Hezekiah gave him all the silver that was found in the house of YHWH, and in the treasures of the king’s house.’
In response to his request Hezekiah emptied the Temple and palace treasuries of silver, which was apparently at the time the standard measure of wealth in Judah, as there does not appear to have been any gold in store. This confirms the relative poverty of Judah at this time. Note again that the emphasis is on all the treasures in Judah, not just those in the Temple. This emptying of both treasuries was a regular indication by the author of YHWH’s unhappiness with the situation (compare 2Ki 12:18; 2Ki 14:14 ; 2Ki 18:15; 2Ki 24:13; 1Ki 14:6; 1Ki 15:18), in this case probably due to the fact that Hezekiah had not turned to YHWH for a solution to his problems. (Compare Isa 7:7; Isa 7:11; Isa 7:14 containing a rebuke to Ahaz for not trusting in YHWH, something which Hezekiah would have known about). Once he did the solution would in fact be found).
2Ki 18:16
‘At that time Hezekiah cut off the gold from the doorposts of the temple of YHWH, and from the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah had overlaid, and gave it to the king of Assyria.’
In order to obtain the required gold Hezekiah had to strip the pillars (and possibly the doorposts, the word occurs nowhere else) of the Temple because all his limited amount of gold had been used for the purpose of honouring YHWH. Both the references to the silver and the gold would suggest that Hezekiah was finding it hard to achieve the required level of tribute, which may well have contributed to Sennacherib’s dissatisfaction with the situation. We must remember that as a result of the circumstances of the invasion Hezekiah had limited opportunities for exacting taxes in order to supplement what was in the treasuries.
2Ki 18:17
‘And the king of Assyria sent Tartan and Rab-saris and Rabshakeh from Lachish to king Hezekiah with a great army to Jerusalem.
Possibly as a consequence of Hezekiah’s failure to achieve the required amount of tribute, or possibly because Sennacherib decided that he wanted to see the proud Hezekiah personally grovelling at his feet (which he in the event admitted never happened), or possibly because of suspicions of a further conspiracy, Sennacherib, instead of withdrawing, sent a large detachment of his troops (‘great army’ is how it was seen by the defenders of Jerusalem) to Jerusalem. The aim was to ensure that no one could go in and out of Jerusalem with a view to starving it into submission. And with the army came three important officials of Assyria, Tartan (the commander-in-chief of the Assyrian armies), Rabsaris (possibly rabu-sa-resi = the one who is at the head, in other words another leading military official); and the Rabshakeh (rab-saqu = chief ruler or cupbearer). In regard to the latter we must remember that to be the king’s cupbearer was to be in the most trustworthy position in the kingdom. Here it represents a top political figure. Sennacherib’s aim was clearly to overawe the people of Jerusalem with the splendour of his messengers.
Isaiah only mentions the Rabshakeh, who was, of course, the spokesman, but Isaiah has a tendency to abbreviation of the original source, although occasionally expanding as compared with Kings. Both 2Ki 18:13; 2Ki 18:17 onwards and Isaiah 36-39 appear to be extracted from the same source (almost word for word), with both maintaining the order of the accounts as contained in the source. If one was copied from the other the order of the accounts might be seen as favouring Isaiah as the original with its movement from Assyria to Babylon.
As we see this army detachment ‘surrounding’ Jerusalem with these three great men at its head, and the citizens of Jerusalem gathered on its wall looking anxiously over, we are reminded of the vivid words of Sennacherib, ‘He himself (Hezekiah) I shut up like a caged bird within Jerusalem his royal city. I put watch-posts strictly around it, and turned back to his disaster any who went out of its city gate.’ It appeared that it would only be a matter of time before Jerusalem went the same way as Damascus.
‘From Lachish.’ Lachish was Judah’s second city and powerfully fortified, although it eventually fell to the Assyrian forces (2Ki 19:8), a disaster vividly portrayed on a relief in Nineveh (a fact which demonstrates that Jerusalem was not taken). It was in the south of the Shephelah (lower foothills) and guarded the way into Judah. Many traces of the siege have been discovered such as weapon-heads, armour scales and the crest socket for a helmet plume.
We may see in this situation a picture of the besieged church of Jesus Christ as it takes its stand in the world with its enemies all about, so vividly depicted in Rev 20:9, ‘and they (those gathered by Satan) went up on the breadth of the earth, and they encompassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city (now composed of all the people of God – Revelation 21).’ As a colony of Heaven on earth (Php 3:20) God’s people are constantly surrounded by the enemy, requiring to be clothed in the full armour of God in order to finally overcome (Eph 6:10-18).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
2Ki 18:13. Now in the fourteenth year, &c. As what remains of this chapter, together with the contents of the 19th and 20th, are found in the book of the prophet Isaiah, and with some additional circumstances, we shall defer our comment upon them till we come to that place.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
This Sennacherib must have been the successor to Shalmaneser. And perhaps his victory over Samaria prompted him to suppose, that he should be conqueror of Jerusalem. And though it is said the Lord prospered Hezekiah whithersoever he went, yet we find the Lord was pleased; in the opening of this siege, to give Sennacherib a temporary triumph, with a vi e w to a more signal display of his own Almighty power, in the salvation of his servant, and his people. Reader! it is one of the Lord’s usual plans of mercy, for the exercise of his peoples faith, and for the manifestation of his own grace and love, to let us see what poor creatures we are, and should forever remain, but for him. Poor Hezekiah needed this lesson, it seems; for when the Lord permitted this enemy to triumph a little, instead of looking to the Lord, he made a pitiful compromise, and bought off the foe with a present. Alas! what poor creatures we are!
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2Ki 18:13 Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did Sennacherib king of Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them.
Ver. 13. Now in the fourteenth year, &c. ] Not long after Hezekiah’s great sickness and signal recovery: whereupon he received that gracious promise, 2Ki 20:6 “And I will add unto thy days fifteen years; and I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria,” &c.
Did Sennacherib.
Come up against all the fenced cities.
And took them.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the fourteenth year. This was the first invasion of Judah which Sennacherib’s inscription enlarges upon, but is only mentioned here. See note on 2Ki 18:17. Compare Isa 36, Isa 37, and 2Ch 32.
all the fenced cities. Forty-six are mentioned in the inscriptions (see App-67).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Threatened by Worldly Might
2Ki 18:13-25
It is an interesting fact that this siege of Lachish is mentioned on the Assyrian monuments, and Sennacherib is depicted as giving orders for its destruction. Also the names and Jewish physiognomy of these ambassadors are clearly recognizable. It was a mistake to bribe the foe; the bribes only excited his cupidity. You may as well come to blows with Apollyon as soon as he straddles across your path; sooner or later the conflict will have to come to a head. Three years afterward, Rabshakeh appeared before the gates of Jerusalem.
It has been suggested that this bold blasphemer was an apostate Jew. He drew a false inference from the recent destructions of altars, etc., which had been reported to him. His taunts were barbed with biting satire. He spoke contemptuously of the little army that was absolutely unable to cope with the disciplined troops of Assyria. It seemed a most unequal conflict which could end only in one way. But he failed to take into account the covenant mercy of God and the heavenly forces which were allied with Hezekiah.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
am 3291, bc 713
the fourteenth: 2Ch 32:1-23, Isa 36:1-22
Sennacherib: Heb. Sanherib
come up: Isa 7:17-25, Isa 8:7, Isa 8:8, Isa 10:5, Hos 12:1, Hos 12:2
Reciprocal: Deu 28:52 – General 2Ki 17:3 – king of Assyria 2Ki 19:4 – the remnant 2Ch 32:4 – kings Isa 10:27 – his burden Isa 28:19 – the time Isa 33:1 – thee that Isa 33:8 – he hath despised Jer 34:7 – Lachish Hos 8:14 – I will send Mic 1:13 – Lachish Nah 1:11 – one
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Ki 18:13. Sennacherib king of Assyria Who succeeded Shalmaneser, probably his son. He was encouraged to make this attempt against Judah by his predecessors success against Israel, whose honours he wished to emulate, and whose victories he would push forward. This invasion of Judah was a great calamity to that kingdom, by which God tried the faith of Hezekiah, and chastised the people, who are called a hypocritical nation, (Isa 10:6,) because they did not heartily concur with Hezekiah in effecting a reformation, nor willingly part with their idols; much less did they give up all their sins, and turn to God in true repentance. Against the fenced cities of Judah, and took them That is, most of them: for that they were not all taken appears from 2Ki 19:8. When he had made himself master of the frontier towns and garrisons, most of the others fell into his hands of course. By this success he was lifted up to his own greater and more shameful destruction, and an eminent occasion was afforded for the manifestation of Gods power and glory in that miraculous deliverance which he designed to effect for his people.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2Ki 18:13 to 2Ki 19:37. Sennacheribs Campaign.
2Ki 18:13. In the fourteenth year: if Hezekiah began to reign five years before the fall of Samaria (722 B.C.), and Sennacherib did not succeed till 706 B.C., this date cannot be correct. The king of Assyria took upwards of 200,000 Jewish captives.
2Ki 18:14. Lachish (p. 28) was besieged by Sennacherib, and his exploits there are depicted on a bas-relief in the British Museum.
2Ki 18:16. which Hezekiah overlaid: Skinner asks, Should it be Solomon? Like Ahaz (2Ki 16:8), Hezekiah despoiled the Temple to buy off the Assyrians.
2Ki 18:17. Tartan (the commander), Rabsaris (chief eunuch), Rabshakeh (chief cupbearer), were three great Assyrian officials.the conduit of the upper pool: cf. 2Ki 20:20; see also 2Ch 32:30.
2Ki 18:19. the great king was a very ancient title, and was later assumed by the Persians. It is frequently used in the cuneiform inscriptions from very ancient times.
2Ki 18:21. The Jews confidence that Egypt would protect them from the Assyrians and other invaders was denounced by Isaiah (Isa 30:1-5), and continually proved fallacious. A similar confidence had caused the ruin of the northern kingdom (2Ki 17:4). Sargon defeated the Egyptians at Raphia in 718 B.C. (pp. 59, 71). Sennacherib had just before this won the victory of El-tekeh (pp. 59, 71). A century later their intrigues with Egypt proved fatal to the Jews in the days of Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
2Ki 18:22. Most critics regard this reference to Hezekiahs reform as an interpolation. But if genuine it bears witness alike to the unpopularity in some quarters of Hezekiahs reform and the shrewd appreciation of the political situation by the observant Rab-shakeh.
2Ki 18:26. The Syrian language was widely diffused throughout the East, and is known as Aramaic (p. 36). It was used by the Jews in Egypt in the fifth century B.C., as the Mond and other papyri testify.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
2. Sennacherib’s challenge to Hezekiah 18:13-37
Samaria’s conqueror, Shalmaneser V, died in 722 B.C. shortly after his conquest. His successor, Sargon II (722-705 B.C.), carried out the deportation of the Israelites. The king who followed him was Sennacherib (705-681 B.C., 2Ki 18:13). Hezekiah’s fourteenth year (2Ki 18:13) as sole ruler over Judah was 701 B.C.
Sennacherib’s inscriptions claim that he conquered 46 strong cities of Hezekiah, plus many villages. In preparation for his siege of Jerusalem, the Assyrian king set up his headquarters at Lachish, 28 miles to the southwest of Jerusalem. Hezekiah had joined an alliance with Phoenicia, Philistia, and Egypt to resist Assyria. He admitted to Sennacherib that this was a mistake (2Ki 18:14). Hezekiah offered to pay whatever Sennacherib would take to avoid a siege of Jerusalem. Sennacherib demanded about 11 tons of silver and one ton of gold, which Hezekiah paid. He did so by stripping the palace and temple that the king had previously re-overlaid to glorify Yahweh (2Ki 18:16).
"In Judah silver appears to have been more valuable than gold." [Note: Wiseman, p. 274.]
Sennacherib accepted the ransom but would not abandon his goal of taking Judah’s capital. The upper pool (2Ki 18:17) was the pool at the Gihon spring on Jerusalem’s east side. From this pool water ran down into the Kidron Valley to a field where the people did their laundry. This was close to the wall of Jerusalem and was a busy area. Rabshakeh stood at the very spot where Isaiah had stood when he warned King Ahaz against making an alliance with Assyria (cf. Isa 7:3-9). Hezekiah sent three of his officials to negotiate with the three representatives that Sennacherib had sent.
"Rabshakeh" was an Assyrian title equivalent to commander-in-chief of the army. The commander assumed Hezekiah was trusting in his Egyptian alliance and that Judah’s gods were no better than those of the other nations. He said that even if the Assyrians provided 2,000 horses for Hezekiah, perhaps what Egypt might have contributed, Judah could not win. The commander’s claim that Yahweh had sent Sennacherib against Judah (2Ki 18:25) may or may not have been true (cf. Isa 45:1-6).
Because many Judahites were hearing the negotiations taking place and would have become fearful as a result, Hezekiah’s officials asked that they proceed in the Aramaic language. Only the educated leaders of Israel understood Aramaic (2Ki 18:26).
"Aramaic was the language of international diplomacy and . . . the normal medium of communication in such a situation." [Note: Auld, p. 240.]
However, the Assyrians wanted all the people to know that surrender would be better than resistance. The commander’s references to the inability of the gods of Samaria would have been especially intimidating since many in Israel had worshipped Yahweh (2Ki 18:35).
The writer recorded this lengthy incident in Kings because it shows the central issues Judah faced. Would she trust in Yahweh or herself? God’s enemies challenged Him again (cf. Exodus 7-11; 1 Samuel 17). Isaiah also recorded these events (2Ki 18:13, 2Ki 17:1 to 2Ki 20:17) in Isa 36:1 to Isa 38:8 and Isa 39:1-8, as did the writer of Chronicles in 2Ch 32:1-23.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
HEZEKIAH AND ASSYRIA
B.C. 701
2Ki 18:13-37; 2Ki 19:1-37
“When, sudden-how think ye the end?
Did I say without friend?
Say rather from marge to blue marge
The whole sky grew his targe,
With the suns self for visible boss.
While an Arm ran across
Which the earth heaved beneath like a breast,
Where the wretch was safe pressed.”
– BROWNING
ALTHOUGH during a few memorable scenes the relations of Judah with Assyria in the reign of Hezekiah leap into fierce light, many previous details are unfortunately left in the deepest obscurity-an obscurity all the more impenetrable from the lack of certain dates. It will perhaps help to simplify our conceptions if we first sketch what is known of Assyria from the cuneiform inscriptions, and then fill up the sketch of those scenes which are more minutely delineated in the Book of Kings and in the prophecies of Isaiah.
Sargon-perhaps a successful general of royal blood, though he never calls himself the son of anyone-seems to have usurped the throne on the death of Shalmaneser IV during the siege of Samaria in B.C. 722. He took Samaria, deported its inhabitants, and re-peopled it from the Assyrian dominions. “In their place,” he says, in his tablets in the halls of his palace at Khorsabad, “I settled the men of countries conquered [by my hand].” In 720 he suppressed a futile attempt at revolt, headed by a pretender named Yahubid, in Hamath, which he reduced to “a heap of ruins.” For some years after this he was occupied mainly on his northern frontiers, but he tells us that until 711 tribute continued to come in from Judah and Philistia. Meanwhile, these terrified and oppressed feudatories, writhing under the remorseless dominion of Nineveh, naturally began to listen to the intrigues of Egypt, whose interest it was to create a bulwark between herself and the invasion of the armies which were the abhorrence of the world. Under the influence of Sabaco which gave new strength and unity to Egypt, she succeeded in seducing Ashdod from its allegiance to Sargon. Sargon at once deposed Azuri, King of Ashdod, and put his brother Ahimit in his place. The Ashdodites soon after deposed Ahimit, and elected in his place Jaman, who was in alliance with Sabaco. This revolt was evidently favoured by Judah, Edom, and Moab; for Sargon says that they, as well as the people of Philistia, “were speaking treason.” The rebellion was crushed by Sargons promptitude. He tells his own tale thus: “In the wrath of my heart I did not divide my army, and I did not diminish the ranks, but I marched against Ashdod with my warriors, who did not separate themselves from the traces of my sandals. I besieged, I took Ashdod and Gunt-Asdodim. I then re-established these towns. I placed [in them] the people whom my arms had conquered, I put over them my lieutenant as governor. I regarded them as Assyrians, and they practiced obedience.” Sargon does not, however, seem to have conducted this campaign in person; for we read in Isa 20:1 “that he sent his Turtan – i.e., his commander-in-chief, whose name seems to have been Zirbani-to Ashdod, who fought against it and took it. The wretched Philistines had put their trust in Sabaco.” The people, says Sargon, “and their evil chiefs sent their presents to Pharaoh, King of Egypt, a prince who could not save them, and besought his alliance.” Isaiah had for three years been indicating how vain this policy was by one of those acted parables which so powerfully affect the Eastern mind. He had, by the word of the Lord, stripped the shoes from off his feet and the upper robe of sackcloth from his loins, and walked, “naked and barefoot, for a sign and portent against Egypt and Ethiopia,” to indicate that even thus should the people of Egypt and Ethiopia be carried away as captives, naked and barefoot, by the kings of Assyria. Egypt was the boast of one party at Jerusalem, and Ethiopia, which had now become master of Egypt under Sabaco, was their expectation; but Isaiahs public self-humiliation showed how utterly their hopes should come to naught. Before the outbreak at Ashdod, Sargon had suppressed a revolt of Hanun, or Hanno, King of Gaza, and Egypt and Assyria first met face to face at Raphia (about B.C. 720), where Sabaco fought in person with an Egyptian contingent, at a spot halfway between Gaza and the “river of Egypt.” {Isa 20:1-6} Sabaco, whom Sargon calls “the Sultan of Egypt” (Siltannu Muzri), had been defeated, and fled precipitately, but Sargon was not then sufficiently free from other complications to advance to the Nile. The hoarded vengeance of Assyria was inflicted upon Egypt nearly a century later by Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. In the two suppressions of revolt at Ashdod, Sargon or his Turtan must have come perilously near Jerusalem, and perhaps he may have inflicted insufficient damage to admit of the boast that he had “conquered” Judaea. If so, his military vanity made him guilty of an exaggeration.
Far more serious to Sargon was the revolt of Merodach-Baladan, King of Chaldaea. Babylon had always been a rival of Nineveh in the competition for world-wide dominion, and for twelve years, as Sargon says, Merodach-Baladan had been “sending ambassadors”-to Hezekiah among others – in the patient effort to consolidate a formidable league. Elam and Media were with him; and at a solemn banquet, for which they had “spread the carpets,” and eaten and drank, the cry had risen, “Arise, ye princes! anoint the shield.” Standing in ideal vision on his watch-tower, Isaiah saw the sweeping rush of the Assyrian troops on their horses and camels on their way to Babylon. What should come of it? The answer is in the words, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon, and all the images of her gods he [Sargon] hath broken to the ground.” Alas! there is no hope from Babylon or its embassy! Would that Isaiah could have held out a hope! But no, “O my threshed one, son of my threshing-floor, that which I have heard from the Lord of hosts; the God of Israel, that have I declared unto you.” And so it came to pass. The brave Babylonian was defeated. In 709 Sargon occupied his palace, took Dur-yakin, to which he had fled for refuge, and made himself Lord Paramount as far as the Persian Gulf. It was his last great enterprise. He built and adorned his palaces, and looked forward to long years of peace and splendor; but in 705 the dagger-thrust of an assassin-a malcontent of the town of Kullum-found its way to his heart; and Sennacherib reigned in his stead.
Sennacherib-Siu-ahi-irba (“Sin, the moon-god, has multiplied brothers”)-was one of the haughtiest, most splendid, and most powerful of all the kings of Assyria, though the petty state of Judah, relying on her God, defied and flouted him. The son of a mighty conqueror, at the head of a magnificent army, he regarded himself as the undisputed lord of the world. Born in the purple, and bred up as crown prince, his primary characteristic was an overweening pride and arrogance, which shows itself in all his inscriptions. He calls himself “the Great King, the Powerful King, the King of the Assyrians, of the nations of the four regions, the diligent ruler, the favorite of the Great Gods, the observer of sworn faith, the guardian of law, the establisher of monuments, the noble hero, the strong warrior, the first of kings, the punisher of unbelievers, the destroyer of wicked men.” He was mighty both in war and peace. His warlike glories are attested by Herodotus, by Polyhistor, by Abydenus, by Demetrius, and by his own annals. His peaceful triumphs are attested by the great palace which he erected at Nineveh, and the magnificent series of sculptured slabs with which he adorned it; by his canals and aqueducts, his gateways and embankments, his Bevian sculpture, and his stele at the Nahr-el-Kelb. He was a worthy successor of his father Sargon, and of the second Tiglath-Pileser-active in his military enterprises, indefatigable, persevering, full of resource.
On one of his bas-reliefs we see this magnificent potentate seated on his throne, holding two arrows in his right hand, while his left grasps the bow. A rich bracelet clasps each of his brawny arms. On his head is the jeweled pyramidal crown of Assyria, with its embroidered lappets. His dark locks stream down over his shoulders, and the long, curled beard flows over his breast. His strongly marked, sensual features wear an aspect of unearthly haughtiness. He is clad in superbly broidered robes, and his throne is covered with rich tapestries, and bas-reliefs of Assyrians or captives, who, like the Greek caryatides, uphold its divisions with their heads and arms.
Yet all this glory faded into darkness, and all this colossal pride crumbled into dust. Sennacherib not only died, like his father, by murder, but by the murderous hands of his own sons, and after the shattering of all his immense pretensions-a defeated and dishonored man.
One of his invasions of Judaea occupies a large part of the Scripture narrative. It was the fourth time of that terrible contact between the great world-power which symbolized all that was tyrannical and idolatrous, and the insignificant tribe which God had chosen for His own inheritance.
In the reign of Ahaz, about B.C. 732, Judah had come into collision with Tiglath-Piteser II.
Under Shalmaneser IV and Sargon, the Northern Kingdom had ceased to exist in 722.
Under Sargon, Judah had been harassed and humbled, and had witnessed the suppression of the Philistian revolt, and of the defeat of the powerful Sabaco at Raphia about 720.
Now came the fourth and most overwhelming calamity. If the patriots of Jerusalem had placed any hopes in the disappearance of the ferocious Sargon, they must speedily have recognized that he had left behind him a no less terrible successor.
Sennacherib reigned apparently twenty-four years (B.C. 705-681). On his accession he placed a brother, whose name is unknown, on the viceregal throne of Babylon, and contented himself with the title of King of the Assyrians. This brother was speedily dethroned by a usurper named Hagisa, who only reigned thirty days, and was then slain by the indefatigable Merodach-Baladan, who held the throne for six months. He was driven out by Belibus, who had been trained “like a little dog” in the palace of Nineveh, but was now made King of Sumir and Accad-i.e., of Babylonia. Sennacherib entered the palace of Babylon and carried off the wife of Merodach and endless spoil in triumph, while Merodach fled into the land of Guzumman, and (like the Duke of Monmouth) hid himself “among the marshes and reeds,” where the Assyrians searched for him for five days, but found no trace of him. After three years (702-699) Belibus proved faithless, and Sennacherib made his son Assur-nadin-sum viceroy of Babylon.
His second campaign was against the Medes in Northern Elam.
His third (701) was against the Khatti (the Hittites)-i.e., against Phoenicia and Palestine. He drove King Luli from Sidon “by the mere terror of the splendor of my sovereignty,” and placed Tubalu (i.e., Ithbaal) in his place, and subdued into tributary districts Arpad, Byblos, Ashdod, Ammon, Moab, and Edom, suppressing at the same time a very abortive rising in Samaria. “All these brought rich presents and kissed my feet.” He also subdued Zidka, King of Askelon, from whom he took Beth-Dagon, Joppa, and other towns. Padi, the King of Ekron, was a faithful vassal of Assyria; he was therefore deposed by the revolting Ekronites, and sent in chains into the safe custody of Hezekiah, who “imprisoned him in darkness.” The rebel states all relied on the Egyptians and Ethiopians. Sennacherib fought against Egyptians and Ethiopians, “in reliance upon Assur my God,” at Altaqu (B.C. 701), and claims to have defeated them, and carried off the sons and charioteers of the King of Egypt, and the charioteers of the kings of Ethiopia. He then tells us that he punished Altaqu and Timnath. {See Jos 19:43} He impaled the rebels of Ekron on stakes all round the city. He restored Padi, and made him a vassal. “Hezekiah [Chazaqiahu] of Judah, who had not submitted to my yoke, the terror of the splendor of my sovereignty overwhelmed. Himself as a bird in a cage, in the midst of Jerusalem, his royal city, I shut up. The Arabians and his dependants, whom he had introduced for the defense of Jerusalem, his royal city, together with thirty talents of gold, eight hundred of silver bullion, precious stones, ivory couches and thrones, an abundant treasure, with his daughters, his harem, and his attendants, I caused to be brought after me to Nineveh. He sent his envoy to pay tribute and render homage.” At the same time, he overran Judaea, took forty-six fenced cities and many smaller towns, “with laying down of walls, hewing about, and trampling down,” and carried off more than two hundred thousand captives with their spoil. Part of Hezekiahs domains was divided among three Philistine vassals who had remained faithful to Assyria.
It was in the midst of this terrible crisis that Hezekiah had sent to Sennacherib at Lachish his offer of submission, saying, “I have offended; return from me; that which thou puttest upon me I will bear.” The spoiling of the palace and Temple was rendered necessary to raise the vast mulct which the Assyrian King requited.
It is at Lachish-now Um-Lakis, a fortified hill in the Shephelah, south of Jerusalem, between Gaza and Eleutheropolis-that we catch another personal glimpse of the mighty oppressor. We see him depicted on his triumphal tablets in the palace-chambers of Kouyunjik, engaged in the siege; for the town offered a determined resistance, and required all the energies and all the trained heroism of his forces. We see him next, carefully painted, seated on his royal throne in magnificent apparel, with his tiara and bracelets, receiving the spoils and captives of the city. The inscription says: “Sennacherib, the mighty king, the king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the throne of judgment at the entrance of the city of Lakisha. I give permission for its slaughter.” He certainly implies that he took the city, but a doubt is thrown on this by 2Ch 32:1, which only says that “he thought to win these cities”; and the historian says {2Ki 19:8} that he “departed from Lachish.” Lachish was evidently a very strong city, and it is so depicted in the palace-tablets at Kouyunjik. It had been fortified by Rehoboam, and had furnished a refuge to the wretched Amaziah.
If Judah and Jerusalem had listened to the messages of Isaiah, {Isa 29:1-24; Isa 30:1-33; Isa 31:1-9} they might have been saved the humiliating affliction which seemed to have plunged the brief sun of their prosperity into seas of blood. He had warned them incessantly and in vain. He had foretold their present desolation, in which Zion should be like a woman seated on the ground, wailing in her despair. He had taught them that formalism was no religion, and that external rites did not win Jehovahs approval. He had told them how foolish it was to put trust in the shadow of Egypt, and had not shrunk from revealing the fearful consequences which should follow the setting up of their own false wisdom against the wisdom of Jehovah. Yet, intermingled with pictures of suffering, and threats of a harvestless year, designed to punish the vanity and display of their women, and the intimation-never actually fulfilled-that even the palace and Temple should become “the joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks,” he constantly implies that the disaster would be followed by a mysterious, divine, complete deliverance, and ultimately by a Messianic reign of joy arid peace. Night is at hand, he said, and darkness; but after the darkness will come a brighter dawn.