Tony Malone & Saint Oxen Books

A New Biblical King Chronology 
Part 5: Additional Cross-References / Overlapping Reigns /
Mystery Reigns / Anomalies
Tony Malone December 2004

1) According to 2Kings 8:16, Southern king Jehoshaphat's reign intersected at some unspecified point with Northern king Jehoram's. On our chart Jehoshaphat reigns from 924-878, and Northern Jehoram reigns from 885-874. Their reigns intersected for about seven years. The reference works.

2) According to 2Kings 9:22-28, Jehu killed Northern Jehoram and Southern Ahaziah, in that order, and then took the Northern throne and continued to systematically wipe out all the descendants of Ahab. On our chart, Jehoram and Ahaziah (2Kings 8:25) both die the same year Jehu takes the throne: 874. The reference works exactly.

There is a second cross reference for Ahaziah, tossed into the text slightly later in the story, which puts Ahaziah's death one year earlier (2Kings 9:29). Ahaziah is supposed to die after Jehoram, so this reference really can't work. The discrepancy is tiny, and we might explain it away as a scribal accident; but in fact it is a marker for us, which alerts us to a pattern among the three double-cross-references (mentioned in Part 2 - details coming up in Part 5D).

3) According to 2Kings 14:17, Southern king Amaziah lived for fifteen years after Northern Jehoash's death. By our chart, Northern Jehoash died in 817 BCE. Fifteen years later we arrive at 803 BCE, and on our list Amaziah's last year began in 803. It appears he died in the early part of his last year of reign. The reference works exactly.

4) According to 2Kings 15:29, Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727) raided the Northern tribes while Pekah was king. Pileser even noted in his annals that while he was taking over the Mediterranean coast, Israel itself threw Pekah out (one Bible reference says that Hoshea killed him and took the throne - 2Kings 15:30). On our list Pekah reigned from 753-734, and archaeology tells us that Tiglath's raid happened in 738, just four or five years before the end of Pekah. Archaeology supports our date.

5) According to 2Kings 17:1-6, Assyrian king Shalmaneser V captured Samaria in Hoshea's ninth year, which was also Hekekiah's sixth (2Kings 18:10).

Internal Integrity: On our list Hoshea's ninth year is 718-717, and Hezekiah's sixth is 719-718. The reference works exactly. This confirms that Hoshea ruled in the later nine year period credited to him (726-718), rather than the previous seven year period also credited to him (733-727).

External: Unfortunately this conflicts with archaeology, though only slightly. Shalmaneser V reigned from 727-722 and had been gone three years before this event. Sargon II took Shalmaneser's place, and he would have intersected with the year 719-718 (more on this in the archaeology section). If we put Hoshea in the earlier period credited to him, he and Shalmaneser will see each other. But the crux for this part of the analysis is that Hoshea's ninth year and Hezekiah's sixth fell at the same time, as the Bible says, and when Hoshea is placed in the later time period, the Biblical cross reference works.

6) According to 2Kings 18:9, Hezekiah's fourth year was concurrent with Hoshea's seventh. By our list Hezekiah's fourth year was 721-720, and Hoshea's seventh was 720-719. Again the numbers match exactly, again confirming that Hoshea ruled during the final Northern time period rather than the second last one.

7) According to 2Kings 18:13, Sennacherib invaded the Southern kingdom during Hezekiah's fourteenth year, which is 711-710 on our list. But Sennacherib was not the king then. Archaeology says his conquest of Lachish and Jerusalem took place in 701, just four years after he (Sennacherib) had come to power. This is a difficult ten year discrepancy; the Bible and our new dates say 711, archaeology says 701. It is amusing to find that of all the lists examined for this thesis, only the Oxford/Jerome list was able to fit these dates together (on their list Hekekiah begins to reign in 715, so his fourteenth year is 701). They had to get something right. However, on the more accurate attempts at assembling a Biblical king list, Hezekiah's fourteenth year never falls at 701. In fact, on both of the lists included at the end of this paper, Hezekiah's fourteenth year is around 713, very close to where our new dates have placed it. This may be a problem that can't be worked out until archaeology finds some new clue. We do find Hezekiah and Sennacherib reigning concurrently for about nine years (Hezekiah 724-696 / Sennacherib 704-681), so we can believe they dealt with each other. But this single reference to Hezekiah's fourteenth year is impossible to reconcile. 701, the date of Sennacherib's invasion, was Hezekiah's twenty-fourth year, not his fourteenth. Could there have been a scribal error?

Northern Kings Overlapping Reigns and Intrigue

1) [the years running from mid 941 to mid 939]
After Jeroboam (from the tribe of Ephraim) reigns for twenty years, he brings his son Nadab to rule under him. They co-reign for two years.

2) [the year running from mid 940 to mid 939]
In 940 Nadab begins his second year reigning under Jeroboam. Baasha (tribe of Issachar) gathers a following and rules over a territory in opposition to Jeroboam's family. A year later, Jeroboam dies, and immediately Baasha murders Nadab and takes his throne.

3) [the year running from mid 917 to mid 915]
After Baasha reigns for twenty-two years, he brings his son Elah to reign under him. They co-reign for two years, and Baasha dies.

4) [the year running from mid 916 to mid 915]
Near the end of Elah's second year, immediately after Baasha's death, Zimri (Elah's chariot captain; unknown tribe) murders him, attempting a coup. Zimri himself is killed one week later.

5) [the years running from late 916 to mid 912]
After Zimri's death, two men jostle for the king's position. Omri (Zimri's army captain; unknown tribe) and a man named Tibni (unknown tribe) have rival reigns for about four years, ruling a split Northern kingdom. Omri then kills Tibni and takes full control. His cross reference places his takeover in 912; he reigns until 901.

6) [the years running from mid 905 to mid 900]
After seven years of sovereign reign, Omri brings his son Ahab to reign under him. They co-reign for five years. Ahab is probably given a portion of territory. He gains prominence all over the Middle East for his excellent chariot crew*. Dad Omri dies in 900. Son Ahab takes the throne and continues to reign another seventeen years.

*see "Foreign Chariotry and Cavalry in the Armies of Tiglath Pileser III and Sargon II", including the Assyrian "horse lists", by Stephanie Dalley, 1985, reported in The Bible Unearthed pg 211.

7) [the year running from mid 886 to mid 885]
In the third-last year of Ahab's reign, he brings his son Ahaziah to reign with him. They co-reign for a year, and in mid 885, Ahaziah falls through a roof and is bedridden.

8) [the year running from mid 885 to mid 884]
When Ahaziah becomes bedridden, his brother Jehoram (also a son of Ahab) is given his position. Ahaziah stays bedridden for a year and then dies, making his official reign two years, with the second year spent laid up. A year after Ahaziah's death, dad Ahab dies in a battle with the Syrians.

Therefore, Jehoram ruled his first year under his father Ahab and brother Ahaziah. Then his brother died, making him full heir to the throne. He ruled his second year under his father. After his father's death he reigned for ten more years, bringing his full term to twelve years.

9) [the years running from mid 832 to mid 829]
After Jehoahaz (unknown tribe) reigns for 14 years, he brings his son Jehoash to reign under him. They co-reign for three years.

10) [the year running from mid 817 to mid 816]
After Jehoash reigns for 15 years, he brings his son Jeroboam II to reign under him. They co-reign for one year.

Southern Kings Overlapping Reigns

1) [the year running from mid 942 to mid 941]
After Abijam reigns for two years, he brings his son Asa to reign under him. They co-reign for one year.

2) [the year running from mid 902 to mid 901]
After Asa reigns for forty years, he brings his son Jehoshaphat to reign under him. They co-reign for one year.

3) [the years running from mid 881 to mid 877]
After Jehoshaphat reigns for twenty-one years, he brings his son Jehoram to reign under him. They co-reign for four years.

4) [the year running from mid 874 to mid 873]
After Jehoram reigns for seven years, he brings his son Ahaziah to reign under him. They co-reign for one year. At the end of this year they both die, as does Northern Jehoram (in Jehu's rampage).

5) [the years running from mid 831 to mid 828]
After Jehoash reigns for thirty-seven years, he brings his son Amaziah to reign under him. They co-reign for three years.

6) [the year running from mid 737 to mid 736]
After Jotham reigns for fifteen years, he brings his son Ahaz to reign under him. They co-reign for one year.

7) [the years running from mid 724 to mid 721]
After Ahaz reigns for thirteen years, he brings his son Hezekiah to reign under him. They co-reign for three years.

The overlapping reigns in both kingdoms are logical and unremarkable.

Three odd cross references were thrown into the action at various places in the Biblical story, giving three kings each a second cross reference. In all three cases, our chart itself chose the one that obviously fit, and support was found for these decisions. The most intriguing thing is that, in every case, the cross reference that fell easily into our chart was always the complete one - the reference that was placed at a logical part of the story (either when the king took the throne or when he died), and which included the number of years he reigned along with other details. The three references which made no sense on our list also made no sense in their Biblical contexts.

1) For Northern Jehoram there were two cross references. His logical reference (18th year of Jehoshaphat) comes at the very beginning of his story (2Kings 3:1), and includes the number of years he reigned and the city he reigned from (Samaria). The Bible goes on from there to recount the Moabite rebellion (supported by archaeology) and Jehoram's role in it.

But two chapters earlier (2Kings 1:17), in the middle of a forty-one-verse fantasy about the prophet Elijah, after Northern king Ahaziah's death, we're suddenly told that Northern Jehoram took the throne "in the second year of Jehoram" (referring to Southern Jehoram). The two Jehorams did reign at the same time. But this places him twelve years later than his other reference; it doesn't include the length of his reign or any other details; and it's engulfed in one of the Elijah legends. And it's impossible.

2Kings 8:16 tells us that Southern Jehoram began his reign in the 5th year of Northern Jehoram. We're given no other reference for that Southern king, and it fits our chart comfortably. So Northern Jehoram cannot begin his reign in the 2nd year of Southern Jehoram - if he has already been reigning five years when Southern Jehoram comes to power. If we attempt to use that date on the chart, a space is created before Northern Jehoram, changing his death date and ruining the Jehu story, and creating chaos on the Southern list.

The Bible's other option for Northern Jehoram (18th year of Jehoshaphat), fit perfectly onto the chart and his death falls at the same time as Southern Ahaziah's. It was logical to use that reference.

2) For Southern Ahaziah there are also two cross references: 12th yr of Jehoram (2Kings 8:25-26), and 11th yr of Jehoram (2Kings 9:29). The difference of one year matters in this part of the story; Ahaziah is supposed to die at a certain date, immediately after Northern Jehoram's murder and in the same year that Jehu takes the Northern throne. One of the references (12th year) falls easily onto the chart. Again, that reference comes at the beginning of Ahaziah's short story, when his father dies, and includes the number of years he reigned, where he reigned from (Jerusalem), and his age at the time. His other, awkward reference, tells only the year he began to reign (a year earlier than the first given), and is dropped into the middle of the story of Jehu's slaughter, after Ahaziah's dead body is deposited in a grave (2Kings 9:29). The murders of Jezebel and many others immediately follow and it makes no sense that this incomplete, inappropriate reference should be placed in this context.

3) For Northern Hoshea, the situation is again identical. One of the references, 12th year of Ahaz (2Kings 17:1) makes sense. It fits into our chart and also connects with other Biblical references, already discussed. This reference comes at the beginning of Hoshea's story, tells where he reigned (Samaria) and for how long.

The other reference, 20th year of Jotham (2Kings 15:30), doesn't make sense - it refers to a year that didn't exist (Jotham reigned 16 years), curiously places Hoshea in two consecutive reign periods, does not tell the length of his reign or other details, and doesn't connect with any other Bible references.

Hoshea's odd reference does appear at a fairly logical place though, at the end of Pekah's short story. Two chapters before Hoshea's tale actually begins, we're told that he murdered Pekah and then took his throne. It is one brief mention without details. From there, the Bible jumps away to someone else's story for awhile, and then returns to deal with Hoshea. When it returns we get the other cross reference (the one that works in our chart) followed by Hoshea's story.

In all three cases, the chart itself chose the reference that worked, and in each case it was the reference that had integrity and contained details. The chart disregarded the faulty and/or incomplete references.

4) Technically, we are also considering Uzziah to have two cross references, though only one of them appears in the Bible (27th year of Jeroboam - 2Kings 15:1). The other, supplied by Josephus (14th year of Jeroboam - Ant 9:10:3), we have deemed to be of equal value to the Biblical references, since both accounts seem to rely on the same original history. Again, one of the references could not be accommodated by the chart, while the other easily fell into its place.

All of the faulty references, and their inability to harmonize with this chart, betray an editor's agenda. To speculate on why the editor was up to such things would require another thesis.