Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Kings 19:9
And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, Behold, he is come out to fight against thee: he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
9. And when he heard say of Tirhakah ] Tirhakah is called by Manetho, Tarakos. He was the third and last king of the 25th dynasty, which was Ethiopian. The duration of his reign is not accurately known. The news of Tirhakah’s advance caused Sennacherib to feel the importance of getting Jerusalem into his possession, seeing it was so much stronger than any position which he yet had. It had been a fortress of considerable importance in the time of the Jebusites (2Sa 5:6), and in the intervening period between David and Hezekiah its defences had been made much more complete.
he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah ] This time they were the bearers of a letter (see below, verse 14) to the king. This may be the letter alluded to 2Ch 32:17.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Tirhakah king of Ethiopia – The Tehrak or Teharka of the hieroglyphics. He was the last king of the 25th or Ethiopian dynasty, which commenced with Shebek or Sabaco, and he reigned upward of 26 years. The Assyrian inscriptions show that he still ruled in Egypt as late as 667 B.C., when Esarhaddon 2Ki 19:37 died, and his son Asshur-bani-pal succeeded him. He probably ascended the Egyptian throne about 692 B.C., having previously ruled over Ethiopia before he became king of Egypt (compare Isa 37:9). Thus he was probably reigning in Ethiopia at the time of Sennacheribs expedition, while Sethos and perhaps other secondary monarchs bore rule over Egypt. His movements caused Sennacherib to send a second embassy, instead of marching in person against the Jewish king.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
King of Ethiopia, Heb. of Cush, i.e. either,
1. Of Arabia, as that word is most commonly meant; of which see the notes, and especially my Latin Synopsis, upon Num 12:1. Or rather,
2. Of Ethiopia beyond Egypt. Nor was there any need that he should force his passage through Egypt, which is objected against this opinion by a very learned man; because the Egyptians (against whom this Sennacherib warred, as heathen historians, Herodotus and Berosus, relate) and the Ethiopians were confederates in this expedition, as Josephus expressly affirms; who lived above 1600 years nearer the time when this was done than we, and therefore was more likely to understand it.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9-13. when he heard say of Tirhakah. . ., Behold, he is come out to fight against thee, &c.Thiswas the “rumor” to which Isaiah referred [2Ki19:7]. Tirhakah reigned in Upper Egypt, while So (or Sabaco)ruled in Lower Egypt. He was a powerful monarch, another Sesostris,and both he and Sabaco have left many monuments of their greatness.The name and figure of Tirhakah receiving war captives, are stillseen in the Egyptian temple of Medinet Abou. This was the expectedsuccor which was sneered at by Rab-shakeh as “a bruised reed”(2Ki 18:21). Rage againstHezekiah for allying himself with Egypt, or the hope of being betterable to meet this attack from the south, induced him, after hearingthe rumor of Tirhakah’s advance, to send a menacing letter toHezekiah, in order that he might force the king of Judah to animmediate surrender of his capital. This letter, couched in the samevaunting and imperious style as the speech of Rab-shakeh, exceeded itin blasphemy, and contained a larger enumeration of conquered places,with the view of terrifying Hezekiah and showing him the utterhopelessness of all attempts at resistance.
2Ki19:14-34. HEZEKIAH’SPRAYER.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
[See comments on 2Ki 19:1]
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(9) Heard say of Tirhakah.For the construction, comp. Psa. 2:7; Psa. 3:2.
Tirhakah.Called in Egyptian inscriptions Taharka, in Assyrian Tarq; the of Manetho, and Teapxwws of Strabo. He was the last king of the 25th, or Ethiopian (Cushite) dynasty, and son of Shabataka the son of Shabaka (2Ki. 17:4). Sennacherib does not name Tirhakah, but calls him the king of Meluhhu, i.e., Mero. The two successors of Sennacherib had further wars with Tirhakah. Esarhaddon, according to notices in the annals of Assurbanipal, conquered Tirhakah, king of Mizraim and Cush, and divided Egypt between a number of vassal kings. A list of twenty names is preserved, beginning with Necho king of Memphis and Sais. This was Esarhaddons tenth expedition (circ. 671 B.C. ). Tirhakah, however, invaded Egypt once more, for he despised the might of Asshur, Istar, and the great gods my lords, and trusted to his own power. This led to Assurbanipals first expedition, which was directed against Egypt. Ewald and Knobel suppose that Isaiah 18 refers to an embassy from Tirhakah asking the co-operation of Judah against the common foe. If it be alleged that Shabataka was still nominal king of Egypt, we may regard Tirhakah as commanding in his fathers name. But Egyptian chronology is too uncertain to be allowed much weight in the question.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9. Tirhakah king of Ethiopia According to Manetho he was the third and last king of the twenty-fifth Egyptian dynasty. His successful resistance of the Assyrian invasion is chronicled on the walls of a temple at Thebes, and his monuments still exist in Egypt and Ethiopia. Rawlinson treats of the events connected with this verse as follows: “The Apis stelae show that Tirhakah did not ascend the throne of E g ypt till B.C. 690, eight years after this; but he may have been already, as he is called in Scripture, king of Ethiopia. It is probable that Sennacherib, having received the submission of Libnah, had advanced upon Egypt. It was important to crush an Egyptian army which had been collected against him by a certain Sethos, one of the many native princes who at this time ruled in the lower country, before the great Ethiopian monarch Tehrak, or Tirhakah, who was known to be on his march, should effect a junction with the troops of this minor potentate. Sethos, with his army, was at Pelusium, ( Herodotus, 2:141,) and Sennacherib, advancing to attack him, had arrived within sight of the Egyptian host, and pitched his camp over against the camp of the enemy, just at the time when Hezekiah received his letter and made the prayer to which Isaiah was instructed to respond. The two hosts lay down at night in their respective stations, the Egyptians and their king full of anxious alarm, Sennacherib and his Assyrians proudly confident, intending on the morrow to advance to the combat and repeat the lesson taught at Raphia and Attaku.” Ancient Monarchies, vol. ii, p. 167.
Sent messengers again For with the Ethiopian forces before him he did not wish to have Jerusalem fall upon his rear, and he apparently hoped to awe Hezekiah into a surrender.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
News of The Approach Of A Large Egyptian Army Under Tirhakah, King Of Cush (the Sudan), Causes A Change Of Attitude And A Further Attempt To Obtain King Hezekiah’s Submission ( 2Ki 19:9-14 ).
The news that a large Egyptian army was approaching led by the son of the Egyptian Pharaoh, who bore the title ‘king of Cush’, caused a hurried change of mind in the Assyrian camp. Now it was more urgent than ever to obtain the surrender and submission of King Hezekiah. So messengers were sent with a letter addressed to ‘Hezekiah King Of Judah’
Its contents were brief and to the point. As they were addressed to Hezekiah himself they clearly did not tell him not to listen to Hezekiah. Nor did he mention Egypt. He did not want Hezekiah to think of Egypt. It might give him the wrong idea. He too might have heard of the approaching Egyptian army. (It was in fact quite remarkable how besieged cities did appear to be able to get messengers in and out). What they concentrated on was the obvious fact of the might of the kings of Assyria past and present, and it should be noted that now it was not ‘King Hezekiah’ who was deceiving the people, it was YHWH! There is a total change of emphasis. Once again it would drive Hezekiah into the presence of YHWH.
Analysis.
a
b “Thus shall you speak to Hezekiah king of Judah, saying, Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, ‘Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria’ ” (2Ki 19:10).
c “Behold, you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands, by destroying them utterly, and will you be delivered?” (2Ki 19:11).
b “Have the gods of the nations delivered them, which my fathers have destroyed, Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, and the children of Eden who were in Telassar? Where is the king of Hamath, and the king of Arpad, and the king of the city of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah?” (2Ki 19:12-13).
a And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it, and Hezekiah went up to the house of YHWH, and spread it before YHWH (2Ki 9:14).
Note that in ‘a’ messengers were sent to Hezekiah, and in the parallel he received the king of Assyria’s letter from their hands. In ‘b’ he is called on, under his royal title, not to let God deceive him into thinking that He could deliver Jerusalem, and in the parallel the contrast is made with the gods of other nations who had failed to deliver their nations and cities. Central in ‘c’ was the reminder of what the kings of Assyria past and present had achieved in destroying ‘all lands’ utterly (a hint of what would happen if they did not immediately surrender).
2Ki 19:9
‘And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Cush, “Behold, he is come out to fight against you,” he sent messengers again to Hezekiah, saying,’
While conducting the siege at Libnah news came to the king of Assyria through his spies that a large Egyptian army was approaching under Tirhakah, ‘king of Cush’. We know that in 701 BC Tirhakah (Egyptian Taharqa; Assyrian Tarqu) was certainly old enough to lead an Egyptian army (errors of the past having been corrected). It has been argued that he was not king of Cush (the Sudan) at that time. But as his father was not only king of Cush but also Pharaoh of Egypt it is quite possible that in fact his father had given him the title of ‘king of Cush’ (a title also used of him in Assyrian records). And even if not so he certainly became king of Cush later. Thus it might just be an identifying description made by the author. Either way there is nothing in it to throw doubt on the narrative.
This threat of an Egyptian army, of an as yet unknown size, naturally alarmed the king of Assyria and made him recognise that he would be advised to obtain the surrender of Jerusalem (and of course Libnah and the other cities of Judah still remaining to be taken) prior to facing up to the Egyptians. The last thing he wanted was to have Judaean forces combining with the Egyptians. Thus he altered his tactics. Instead of appealing directly to the people of Jerusalem and degrading ‘Hezekiah’ in order to undermine his authority, he now sought to approach king Hezekiah directly, treating him with honour, and using as his argument the unfailing ability of kings of Assyria to defeat whom they would.
2Ki 19:10
“Thus shall you speak to Hezekiah king of Judah, saying, Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, ‘Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.’ ”
This time his message was addressed in all honour to ‘Hezekiah, King of Judah’. And he called on him not to let ‘his God’ deceive him into thinking that He could deliver Jerusalem out of the king of Assyria’s hand. It would appear that he was aware that YHWH had so spoken through His prophet(s). But he wanted him to recognise that it was a vain hope for the reasons now to be given.
2Ki 19:11
“Behold, you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all lands, by destroying them utterly, and will you be delivered?”
He would undoubtedly have heard what the kings of Assyria had done to ‘all lands’ in the past. None of them had been able to resist him and such of them as had not submitted had been utterly destroyed because of their failure to submit. That being so how could king Hezekiah hope to be an exception? How could he expect that he alone would be delivered?
‘Destroying them utterly.’ The word initially indicated being put under the sacred Ban and thus being completely destroyed as ‘belonging to a deity’ (compare Jericho – Jos 6:24). But by this time it could simply indicate being utterly destroyed.
2Ki 19:12
“Have the gods of the nations delivered them, which my fathers have destroyed, Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, and the children of Eden who were in Telassar?”
Then he listed nations which his fathers had destroyed, and pointed out that their gods had been unable to deliver them from the kings of Assyria. Gozan was Tel Halaf, taken by the Assyrian in 809 BC. Rezeph may be Rezaphe, north east of Damascus, taken in 841 BC. Eden was the Assyrian province of Bit Adini south of Harran with Telassar (Tel Assur) being one of its towns (compare Isa 37:12). All these victories would have been well known to politically aware Judaeans. And that being so how could they hope that YHWH would be able to do anything different?
2Ki 19:13
“Where is the king of Hamath, and the king of Arpad, and the king of the city of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah?”
Indeed let King Hezekiah himself consider what had happened to their kings and learn a lesson from it. Where now was the king of Hamath (to the north of Damascus, on the east bank of the Orontes; taken in 840 BC and retaken in 820 BC), the King of Arpad (a city in north Syria, Tel Rif‘at, 30 kilometres (twenty miles) north west of Aleppo, also taken in 840 BC and retaken in 820 BC), the king of Sepharvaim (site unknown although some identify with Sibraim near Damascus), the king of Hena (possibly Ana on the Euphrates), the king of Ivvah (compare 2Ki 17:24. Site unknown)? Sennacherib’s hope was to break Hezekiah’s spirit.
2Ki 19:14
‘And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it, and Hezekiah went up to the house of YHWH, and spread it before YHWH.’
Hezekiah’s response was to receive the letter from the hand of the messengers, read it and then go to the Temple of YHWH and spread it out before YHWH. ‘Before YHWH’ often only indicates simply the inner court, but Hezekiah may well have entered the porch of the Holy Place. He could not, of course, enter the Holy Place itself. That was only for the priests. Compare here Eze 46:2. The ‘spreading out’ indicates a document on either papyrus or leather.
There is a reminder for us all here that when we receive a difficult communication, the next thing to do after reading it is to spread it out before God.
In Mesopotamia it was normal practise for political communications, once read, to be lodged in a temple where the gods could be made aware of them. Hezekiah’s behaviour stressed his belief in the personal interest of YHWH in what had been written.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
2Ki 19:9 And when he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, Behold, he is come out to fight against thee: he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
Ver. 9. Of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia. ] A potent prince. See 2Ch 14:9 . Strabo a called him Tearkon the Ethiopian; and further relateth out of Megasthenes, an old historian, that he passed into Europe, and advanced as far as to Hercules’s pillars.
King of Ethiopia.
Behold, he is come out to fight against thee.
He sent messengers.
a Lib. i. cap. 15.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Tirhakah. An Ethiopian by birth; king of Egypt by conquest. Defeated later by Esarhaddon, son of Sennacherib, after fifteen days’ battle. Esarhaddon is shown on a stele, recently discovered, leading Tirhakah with cords.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
when he heard: When Sennacherib had levied contributions on Hezekiah, he marched his army into Egypt; where, after several successes, he laid siege to Pelusium, and spent much time in it; but hearing that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, whom Strabo calls Therchon, was marching against him with a great army, to assist his kinsman Sevechus, or Sethon, the king of Egypt, he durst not abide his coming, but raised the siege; and returning to Judea, he encamped against Lachish, and afterwards against Libnah. But finding that Tirhakah pursued him as a fugitive, he marched back to encounter him; and having totally routed his army, he returned to wreak his vengeance on Hezekiah. 1Sa 23:27, Isa 37:9
sent: 2Ki 18:17
Reciprocal: 1Ki 20:2 – General 2Ch 14:9 – Zerah 2Ch 32:17 – He wrote Isa 18:1 – which Isa 37:8 – Rabshakeh Jer 29:25 – Because Hos 13:16 – Samaria Nah 2:13 – the voice
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Ki 19:9. He heard say of Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, &c. Probably of Ethiopia beyond Egypt. For Josephus affirms that the Egyptians (against whom, according to Herodotus and Berosus, this Sennacherib warred) and Ethiopians were confederates in this expedition. It is most likely he was the same with the Sabaco of Herodotus. See Universal Hist., vol. 4, p. 321. He sent messengers again unto Hezekiah It is probable the king of Assyria thought by this message to terrify Hezekiah and the people to compliance, which it was now the more necessary for him to do, as the invasion of Tirhakah rendered it less proper for him to attempt so long a siege as that of Jerusalem was likely to prove.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
19:9 And when {e} he heard say of Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, {f} Behold, he is come out to fight against thee: he sent messengers again unto Hezekiah, saying,
(e) That is, Sennacherib.
(f) For the kings of Ethiopia and Egypt joined together against the king of Assyria because of his oppression of other countries.