CHAPTER XXIII.

UZZIAH OR AZARIAH.

Uzziah made king by the popular choice-His greatness both in war and peace-His occupation of Elath-His war with the Philistines-His conquest of the Arabs of Gur-Baal and of the Maonites-Submission to him of the Ammonites-His measures for home defence-His patronage of husbandry-General character of his reign-His great sin-His deposition and death.

ON the murder of Amaziah, king of Judah, by conspirators at Lachish, the people are stated to have taken Azariah, or Uzziah, one of Amaziah's sons, a youth of sixteen years of age, and made him king in his father's room (2 Kings xiv. 21). It is uncertain whether he was Amaziah's eldest son, and so pointed out for monarch by the law of primogeniture; or whether he was a younger son, whom the people selected from a belief that he possessed qualities that made him especially fit to rule. There seems to be an indication of his having already won the popular favour, in the expression used by the writer of Chronicles (2 Chron. xxvi. 1), that "all the people of Judah took him and made him king." The choice made, if it were really a choice, was amply justified by the result. Azariah, as Ewald says,* I 66 was equally great in the arts of peace and in those of war." His reign was, as Dean Stanley remarks, "the most prosperous, excepting that of Jehoshaphat, since the time of Solomon." By his military successes in various quarters he amply compensated for his father's defeat at Beth-shemesh (2 Kings xiv. 13), and by his judicious preparations against History of Israel," vol. iv. p. 143, Eng. tr. 2 "Lectures on the Jewish Church," vol. ii. p. 372.

I ""

attack he obtained the respect of all the neighbouring nations. The Chronicler tells us that "his name spread far abroad, even to the entering in of Egypt " (2 Chron. xxvi. 8, 15).

Among his earliest enterprises seems to have been an expedition into Edom, for the purpose of re-establishing the sea-port of Elath, and renewing the navigation of the Red Sea, and the commerce in that quarter, which had been once established by Solomon, and the renewal of which had been subsequently attempted, but without successful result, by Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xxii. 48; 2 Chron. xx. 35-37). If Edom had, as some think, revolted from Amaziah after his misfortune at Beth-shemesh, and recovered its independence, Azariah's expedition must have been on a great scale, and have effected the re-conquest of the country; but if, as seems more probable, there had been no such rebellion, then it would have been merely a peaceful enterprise, involving no great difficulty, but still of very considerable importance. The power which held Elath naturally exercised a certain influence over the Sinaitic peninsula with its mines of copper and turquoise, could enter readily into relations with Egypt, and might even aspire to a share in the valuable Red Sea commerce, which gave Solomon his great wealth (1 Kings ix. 26–28; x. II, 14). It was indicative of much vigour and selfconfidence that such an enterprise should have been undertaken at all, especially by a youth of sixteen; and the actual establishment of Judah upon the southern sea must have much increased her prestige, and, as time went on, would be sure to increase her prosperity.

Azariah seems next to have "gone forth and warred against the Philistines" (2 Chron. xxvi. 6). The Philistines were always unquiet neighbours of the Jews, and required from time to time to be severely chastised, and compelled, as it were, into good behaviour. Azariah invaded their country in force, and attacked successively Gath, Jabneh, and Ashdod, three of their strongest fortresses. None of them was able to resist him. Azariah "smote whole Palestina with a rod" (Isa. xiv. 9); took the places one after another, and "brake down the walls" (2 Chron. xxvi. 6); or, as some think, actually razed the cities to the ground. Moreover, he occupied the subjugated territory, and

So Ewald ("Hist. of Israel," vol. iv. p. 143) and Stanley (" Lectures," vol. ii. p. 372). Compare Josephus, "Ant. Jud." ix. 10, § 3:-кATÉOKAYEV αὐτῶν τὰ τείχη.

planted it with new towns, in which, no doubt, Philistines and Hebrews would dwell together. This was probably the origin of that mongrel race, whereof we hear later in the history, which could not speak Hebrew properly, but used a jargon partly Hebrew and partly Ashdodite (Neh. xiii. 24; Zech. ix. 6).

While thus employed in extending and consolidating his power in the south-east and the south-west, Azariah naturally came into hostile collision with the Arab tribes, which regarded the wild districts of the Negeb as a sort of “happy huntingground," over which they were free to wander, and within which they were free to plunder, at their pleasure. 66 'The Arabs of Gur-Baal, and the Mehunim," or Maonites, are especially mentioned (2 Chron. xxvi. 7); but under these designations may be included the wild tribes generally which formed the population of the sterile tract intervening between Southern Judæa and the Egyptian frontier. It was necessary to bring these fierce marauders into subjection in order to give tranquillity to his own southern border, to the territory taken from Philistia, and to the subjected country of the Idumæans. Azariah engaged in hostilities against these tribes, and, God helping him (ibid.), brought them under subjection.

The submission of the Ammonites seems to have been effected in a different way. Nothing is said of any campaign against them; and the probability is that their submission (ibid. ver. 8) was voluntary. Ewald's statement on the subject, if a little too positive, embodies the view, which, under all the circumstances of the case, is best worthy of acceptance. "When, on the fall of the house of Jehu," he says, "the countries beyond Jordan were thrown into great confusion, Ammon, Moab, and the Hebrew districts lying between them, implored the protection of Uzziah (Azariah), and paid him a yearly tribute. This surprising phenomenon, which, however, is historically beyond question, is sufficiently explained by the circumstances of the time. Ammon and Moab had been again subject to the kingdom of the Ten Tribes, even if they retained princes of their own, for half a century. Damascus, itself in a state of dissolution at the time, could guarantee them no protection; and yet the Assyrians in the distance, and the constantly repeated incursions of the Arab tribes near at hand, might seem so History of Israel," vol. iv. pp. 144, 145.

threatening, that they voluntarily sought the protection of the just and powerful monarch who already possessed Edom on their southern boundary, and had subdued the neighbouring Arabs. By this arrangement, moreover, they retained their own princes (2 Chron. xxvii. 5). These relations continued under Uzziah's son Jotham, but led to fresh complications, which will be explained hereafter." The submission of the Ammonites seems to have included, besides the payment of tribute (2 Chron. xxvi. 8), the cession of a right of pasture to Uzziah for his flocks and herds in their country' (ibid. ver. 10).

2

Azariah's successes abroad were accompanied by a policy of wise vigilance and activity at home, which was well calculated to secure his territories from attack on the part of his neighbours. He strengthened the defences of Jerusalem by building towers at its three weakest points-"the corner gate," a gate probably at the north-western angle of the city, where the north wall abutted on the Valley of Hinnom-"the valley gate," midway in the western wall, corresponding to the modern gate of Jaffa and "the turning of the wall," a weak place in the defences of the eastern city (Neh. iii. 19), perhaps "the southern point of the valley of the Tyropoon." He protected the wild pasture region towards the south-east and south, by building towers (2 Chron. xxvi. 10) in which the population could take refuge in case of a sudden raid, and at the same time improved the productiveness of the tract by cutting cisterns 3 for the storing of the rain-water in many places. He organized, equipped, and disciplined the military force of the country on a new plan. Retaining or recalling David's institution of the Gibborim, or "Mighty men of valour," he raised the number from the "Six Hundred " of David's time to two thousand six hundred, thus more than quadrupling this important body of picked troops. The remainder of the fighting force of the country, which amounted to three hundred and seven thousand five hundred men, was organized into bands by his captain of the host, Hananiah, assisted by Jeiel the scribe and Maaseiah the ruler, who made out and kept a register of the entire numI See the writer's note on 2 Chron. xxvi. 10, in the "Speaker's Commentary," vol. iii. p. 344.

2 So Ewald ("History of Israel," vol. iv. p. 144).

3 See the marginal translation of 2 Chron. xxvi. 10 in the Authorized Version.

ber (ibid. ver. II, 13). The arms provided for them consisted of shields, spears, helmets, habergeons, bows and arrows, and slings (ibid. ver. 14). For the defence of Jerusalem in case of attack, Azariah collected a large number of military engines, such as had long been employed by the Assyrians and Egyptians in their sieges; some resembled the Roman balista, which hurled huge stones against the enemy; others corresponded to the Roman catapulta, which shot forth darts and javelins. These were distributed along the line of the walls and placed in commanding positions upon the towers, ready for instant use in case the siege of the city were attempted.

Moreover, Azariah "loved husbandry." He possessed, himself, numerous flocks and herds, for which he claimed a right of pasturage, both in the high Judæan upland, and in the Shephelah or low country towards the coast, and also in the midbar, or rolling downs, east of the Jordan and the Dead Sea (ibid. ver. 10). He had "husbandmen and vine-dressers" in the mountains, and many a vineyard in the "Carmels" or fertile and sheltered regions among the hills. The towers " and "cisterns" which he constructed were no doubt mainly for his own use, but they must also have been of general advantage to his subjects.

66

The summary of Azariah's reign, both in Kings (2 Kings xv. 3) and Chronicles (2 Chron. xxvi. 4), declares him to have been a good king—“He did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father Amaziah had done." There is, of course, the usual reservation, that under him "the high places were not removed; the people sacrificed and burnt incense still on the high places" (2 Kings xv. 4); and the writer of Chronicles adds the qualifying statement, that Azariah "sought God in the days of Zechariah, who had understanding in the visions of God" (2 Chron. xxvi. 5), by which it would appear that Azariah, like Joash, his grandfather, was in the earlier part of his reign faithful to Jehovah and the national religion under the influence of a Jehovistic prophet, but afterwards, when this influence was removed, probably by the pro

1 See the author's "Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii. p. 81.

2 Stanley speaks of "the southern Carmel" ("Lectures," vol. ii. p. 373); but no such place is known to us. Any sheltered tract among the hills suited for the growth of fruit trees was a "carmel." (See Isa. xxix. 17, xxxii. 15; Jer. ii. 7 ; &c.)